Culture Human evolution Intelligent Design Mind

Human evolution: Ancient art not really symbolic, cognitive scientist claims

Spread the love
File:Blombos Cave engrave ochre 1.jpg
engraved ochre from Blombos/Chris. S. Henshilwood

From Michael Erard at Science:

About 100,000 years ago, ancient humans started etching lines and hashtag patterns onto red rocks in a South African cave. Such handiwork has been cited as the first sign our species could make symbols—distinct marks that stand for some meaning—and thus evidence of a sophisticated mind. But a new study, reported here this week at Evolang, a biannual conference on the evolution of language, finds that these markings and others like them lack key characteristics of symbols. Instead, they may have been more for decoration or enjoyment.

Tylén’s team found that, in the eyes of today’s humans, younger markings had more clearly defined visual elements and were more aesthetically regular than older ones. Participants also could remember and reproduce the more recent markings better than the older ones. But people weren’t able to sort the markings into the correct groupings by place, and weren’t able to distinguish signs from each other.

That’s a minimal test of being a symbol—being distinct from another marking—and the engravings failed. “That suggests that we’re not looking at a symbolic system in the sense that each marking has an individual meaning,” Tylén said to meeting attendees. More.

Some colleagues, while polite, were not convinced and I am not either. The markings were not intended to communicate with the Danish university students enrolled in Tylén’s study and may reference matters unknown to them.

More generally, all art is symbolic in some sense. Even what seems merely decorative (flowery wallpaper and sofa fabric come to mind) is both a status marker and an expression of a view of the world. The blank spaces and stick furniture of minimalism convey a message too, by what is missing. One wonders why that seems hard to understand.

Life forms that cannot think symbolically would not do any kind of art at all.

See also: Neanderthal artwork found: “Academic bombshell” obliterates “lesser human” theory?

and

Early human religion: A 747 built in the basement with an X-Acto knife

2 Replies to “Human evolution: Ancient art not really symbolic, cognitive scientist claims

  1. 1
    vmahuna says:

    The simple fact that a human spent HOURS carving a CONTINUOUS pattern on a stone SPECIFICALLY selected for its squarish, oblong shape says a LOT about the Carver of Stones.

    Some animals construct nests and such in well patterned, consistently styled ways. But these things are not portable, as the stone clearly is.

    Written language is a VERY very modern invention (less than 5,000 years old). But the need for writing is related to Civilization (dwelling in permanent cities for reasons other than religious ceremonies). For thousands of years before that humans spent their winters huddled around campfires telling each other stories and carving designs into bones and ivory and apparently stones. Successfully carving a repeating pattern requires a certain amount of Organized Thought.

  2. 2
    News says:

    Yes, vmahuna at 1, and all art is symbolic thought. Whether someone who does not know what it refers to can interpret it is another question.

    Who, after all, has figured out the Voynich Manuscript?

    See AI and the Voynich Manuscript

Leave a Reply