-
I think you are also aware that effective refutation usually involves some reference to research, or secondary sources?
Well, that would have been a more reasonable response to Oliver than "You didn't write a book", but intellectual arguments against the book, such as Oliver made, aren't unreasonable. If they're not present, people are just playing a "the books I read are better than the book you read" dick-sizing game. "These aren't arguments you can confidently make about the way Neanderthals thought, given the lack of evidence" is a reasonable argument. "Here's the evidence you missed that does validate the argument and this is why it's important" would be a reasonable response. "You didn't write a book" isn't.
itsbruce-
I wrote 'I look forward to reading your book' which is quite different to the formulation you have misquoted. I thought it was quite gentle, and also a nod to Oliver's evident lay interest in this subject area.
This is overly long and boring already, but I think the line that mildly peaked me in the original response was that it is 'utter nonsense' that Neanderthals were a divergent intelligence. To briefly reprise some of the arguments from the book:
1). Given the distance since a common ancestor, it is reasonable to believe that there is evolutionary divergence between Neanderthals and Sapiens. For context, it is one twentieth of the span from the common ancestor that separates us from all other apes
2). Neanderthals brain size was evidently larger than sapiens, allowing for the possibility of significant differences in cognition.
3). There is scant evidence for neanderthal art, contra to sapiens who created art that is relatable to us at all times and places since the species emergence. This demonstrates asignificant difference in the way we understand the world. In Slimak's view it demonstrates egotism in Sapiens that was absent in Neanderthals, who he believes were more in harmony with the cosmos.
4). In the production of tools, Sapiens demonstrated standardisation of processes since the advent of behavioural modernity at least 70 millennia ago. By contrast, Neanderthal tools were each individual and expressed the craftsmanship of the artisan.
There is more, but that is the core of his thesis. It is obviously speculative, because there is limited material evidence. I would be interested in a survey of the literature that argues alternative views.
t-v
Thank you, I am aware. I think you are also aware that effective refutation usually involves some reference to research, or secondary sources? I think anyone who has read a bit in this space knows there is an active debate among expert practitioners over whether Neanderthal populations were replaced or assimilated by Homo Sapiens. I also think Slimak's contribution deserves respect, not least because he has spent countless difficult hours digging to try and enrich our understanding. Not to say that makes his view definitive.