I got his book to get an overview of the most recent findings in the evolution of Homo sapiens. I have read scores of books during the last 60 years on the origin of species and the descent of man and I like to keep up on the science. Unfortunately I learned absolutely nothing new from this book except that the lead author calls himself an "archeology psychologist" which is a discipline I had never heard of before.
This is a field, it turns out, is one where you don't need actual evidence to specu I got his book to get an overview of the most recent findings in the evolution of Homo sapiens. This is a field, it turns out, is one where you don't need actual evidence to speculate about how we became human.
The author states frankly that there are two kinds of archeologists, those that need actual evidence and those that don't. So this book is based on pure speculation of how our species probably evolved, based on what we are today. I was trained and worked as an earth scientist so the approach of this book is simply pure nonsense to me. It is a big stretch to give it 2 stars. It did remind me of some things I already knew of the wonderful science of why we are here. I received this book in exchange for an honest review from Goodreads First Reads and instantly knew that my husband would enjoy this book more than I would have.
I'm into fiction and he is into non-fiction. Here is Martin's take on this very interesting book — He read me quite a few passages, all of which were fascinating. Somewhere back in time in primate evolution, perhaps about 7 million years ago, some ape like precursor to Chimpanzees and Humans hit an evolutionary fork in the road, one side I received this book in exchange for an honest review from Goodreads First Reads and instantly knew that my husband would enjoy this book more than I would have.
Somewhere back in time in primate evolution, perhaps about 7 million years ago, some ape like precursor to Chimpanzees and Humans hit an evolutionary fork in the road, one side leading to modern Chimpanzees, the other to modern humans. The earliest fossils on the human side of this division have a brain size of around cc.
This book is the result of a multi-year research project using multiple disciplines: archeology, social archeology, evolutionary psychology and many more; to explore the how and why the brain evolved from cc to cc and the hypothesis is quite interesting. It is not a textbook by any stretch, even though it is the result of scholarly research. Dec 09, Jeannette rated it liked it.
Thinking Big: How the Evolution of Social Life Shaped the Human Mind
Good try guys! Oddly, on Goodreads, the author of this book comes up as Robin Dunbar. Conclusion is that is all because of our social connections and the need to deal with the nexus of relationships that made us such successful primate survivor Good try guys! Conclusion is that is all because of our social connections and the need to deal with the nexus of relationships that made us such successful primate survivors.
Dunbar's number of around human relationships that can be maintained is something we explored back in our Cambridge days and we've been happily reminded of its importance over the decades since.
Now the team that wrote this book put all the info together and spell out how it all works, the Social Mind. As a popular book, I hope more people read it, but for me, I wanted more.
Why These Geese Wear Tiny Backpacks and Fly in a Wind Tunnel
I'm left with a hunger for more detail about the development of material things, how memes work, how people spread around the world, how groups really work day to day, how modern minds might be working with the overwhelming numbers of people and information out there. Aug 12, Dave Schey rated it really liked it Shelves: non-fiction. In Thinking Big, the authors do a good job of showing how the evolution of our Hominin ancestors and the development of tools, art, religion, music, kinship, myths, etc.
Their emphasis is on the evolution of our brain and the resulting orders of intentionality that were then made possible. The 6 orders of intentionality are: 1st Order - Present in monkeys and lesser apes and some mammals such as elephants and dolphins - expressed by self-awareness as judged by reco In Thinking Big, the authors do a good job of showing how the evolution of our Hominin ancestors and the development of tools, art, religion, music, kinship, myths, etc. The 6 orders of intentionality are: 1st Order - Present in monkeys and lesser apes and some mammals such as elephants and dolphins - expressed by self-awareness as judged by recognizing yourself in a mirror or a belief about something.
May 04, Ernest Barker rated it really liked it.
- Start-Up Guide for the Technopreneur: Financial Planning, Decision Making and Negotiating from Incubation to Exit.
- Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?.
- Reign of Iron (Iron Age, Book 3).
- News and Comment.
- Pollen Biology: A Laboratory Manual?
- Social evolution;
- Thinking Big: How the Evolution of Social Life Shaped the Human Mind by Clive Gamble!
I like this book. It is centered on how evolution develop our mind hence "Thinking Big". This review says it better than I can.
Steps Toward a Relational Biology
May 06, Adrian added it. This book was the result of the Lucy project which combined the insights of psychology and archaeology to determine how and when the human mind evolved into what it is today. Much is made of two psychological ideas; theory of mind and order of intentionality which are capacities which separate modern humans from apes and Neanderthals.
These scientists believe that it was the need to socialize and work with an expanded group of individuals while roughing it on the African savannah that increased This book was the result of the Lucy project which combined the insights of psychology and archaeology to determine how and when the human mind evolved into what it is today.
These scientists believe that it was the need to socialize and work with an expanded group of individuals while roughing it on the African savannah that increased our brain capacity and led to things we can actually recover from the archaeological record like sophisticated tools, fire and art. There is much that is speculative here but some suppositions are interesting, for example, there is an idea that laughing replaced finger tip grooming such as the apes do and that laughing led to music and music to language. Simon Bloomhill rated it really liked it Nov 08, Nour rated it it was amazing Mar 05, Carlos rated it it was amazing Mar 19, Sabrina rated it really liked it Dec 30, Irakli Kavtaradze rated it really liked it Mar 15, Ryan Chynces rated it really liked it Dec 22, Far ahead of its time when first published, the book anticipates debates at the forefront of contemporary thinking.
Revisiting the work after almost thirty years, Tim Ingold offers a substantial new preface that describes how the book came to be written, how it was received and its bearing on later developments.
- Oxford Handbook of Clinical Diagnosis.
- How Humans Became Social.
- Social evolution - Latest research and news | Nature?
Unique in scope and breadth of theoretical vision, Evolution and Social Life cuts across the boundaries of natural science and the humanities to provide a major contribution both to the history of anthropological and social thought, and to contemporary debate on the relationship between human nature, culture, and social life.
Search all titles. Search all titles Search all collections. Your Account Logout. Most sensible social and cultural anthropologists effectively abandoned the idea some fifty years ago because it made no sense of the phenomena we were dealing with and served only to reproduce a colonial distinction between western-educated scientists who study culture and everyone else who lives in them.
We, at least, have moved on. Let me explain why the paradigm of evolutionary science that Sloan Wilson advocates seems to me to be an intellectual dead-end. Forty years ago, in , I brought out a book entitled Evolution and Social Life recently reissued as a Routledge Classic, Ingold The book explored the history of the idea of evolution in anthropology, biology and history from the mid-nineteenth century until recent times. I began with Darwin, Morgan, Tylor, Marx and Durkheim and ended with sociobiology and gene-culture coevolution this was before the days of evolutionary psychology.
What All Theories of Social Evolution Share In Common – The Evolution Institute
The book was long and heavy-going, and ultimately, it failed. It failed because I had attempted to synthesise what a biology forged on neo-Darwinian principles was telling us about human biocultural evolution with what I knew from social anthropology about persons and social relations. The problem is this. Whether the specification is genetic or cultural, or some mixture of the two, is immaterial: the logic remains the same.
In writing Evolution and Social Life I had assumed that my task was not to challenge accepted biological wisdom but to reconcile it with what contemporary anthropology has to teach us about the constitution of human beings as persons. This is that the identities, characteristics and dispositions of persons are not bestowed upon them in advance of their involvement with others but are the condensations of histories of growth and maturations within fields of relationships. Thus every person emerges as a locus of development within such a field, which is in turn carried on and transformed through their own actions.
Only by supposing that person and organism are entirely separate components of human being could one possibly entertain both ways of thinking at once. Such a split-level view of the human, however, is manifestly unsustainable. Only later did it dawn on me that if persons are organisms, then the principles of relational thinking — far from being restricted to the domain of human sociality — must be applicable across the entire continuum of organic life, and that this would require a radically alternative biology.
If every organism is not so much a discrete entity as a node in a field of relationships, then we have to think in a new way not only about the interdependence of organisms and their environments but also about their evolution. My work has been guided by this aim ever since. I am by no means alone in advocating a relational biology.
Plenty of heterodox thinkers, especially developmental biologists, have been pursuing similar ideas for many years. Indeed, given that there are vastly more practising biologists than there are anthropologists, the absolute number of dissenting voices is probably greater in biology than in anthropology and all the other human sciences put together, even though they remain in the minority in their own discipline.