Evolutionary Theorists Stymied by the Human Mind

Evolutionary Theorists Stymied by the Human Mind

Denyse O’Leary

The little-noticed trend is that the historical evidence of humans thinking like humans keeps getting pushed back by many thousands of years as more artifacts from the very ancient past turn up. “Earlier than thought” has become a science media cliche in this area. In May of this year, we learned that the controlled use of fire was pushed back to 250,000 years ago. In June we heard about stone tools from 700,000 years ago, “likely used for butchering animals and processing wood or other plant matter.” Then there is the evidence for travel by watercraft. The watercraft themselves did not survive but tools from about 130,000 years ago, found on remote islands like Crete, did. “I was flabbergasted,” Boston University archaeologist and stone-tool expert Curtis Runnels told media. “The idea of finding tools from this very early time period on Crete was about as believable as finding an iPod in King Tut’s tomb.” As we find more and more artifacts giving evidence of complex thought, the origin of the mind recedes into a more distant, perhaps irrecoverable past.

 
Definitely interesting, and I do recall an admittedly anonymous academic on Kastrup's old forum who talked about some of the new evidence rattling materialist-atheist assumptions. However ->

With respect to the origin of the human mind, traditional religious explanations shed more light than a science-based approach driven by materialist assumptions. That is, the traditional explanations begin by recognizing that humans are not just animals and offering an account for that fact. It is increasingly apparent that that older approach fits the pattern of the evidence.

I am not sure about this. If she means explanations about something immaterial entering the material, then I guess I could see this holding true...but I don't [know] if it's enough to recognize humans have a supposed difference from animals, especially given the research into animal consciousness and even plant consciousness is progressing.

It may be the case that what is immaterial about the mind is not limited to humans but extends down the "Ladder of Being"...

I don't mind Mind Matters, but they definitely have a religious leaning bent which you notice when they throw in things like 'traditional religious explanations'. Have to take them with a grain of salt because of that.

I don't mind Mind Matters, but they definitely have a religious leaning bent which you notice when they throw in things like 'traditional religious explanations'. Have to take them with a grain of salt because of that.

Yes, it's important to keep biases in mind when seeking information on the internet. What I appreciate about the Discovery Institute is that they don't seem to lie or believe we all live in some grand conspiracy. They use the god of the gaps to argue for their religious inclinations but maintain scientific integrity wherever science seems indisputable given current knowledge (of course, new observations can always emerge that falsify existing scientific theories). People who insist that naturalism can explain everything label their work as pseudo-science, but similarly, many 'naturalism' theories without any experimental backing can also be labeled as pseudo-science.