From: Trehinp@aol.com
Date: Fri 13 Feb 2004 - 21:48:28 GMT
Dans un e-mail daté du 13/02/2004 19:21:30 Paris, Madrid, I.Price@shu.ac.uk a 
écrit :
> Interesting but not surprising that the technology then went in to stasis 
> for a million years or so. One can imagine (yes it is a
> just so story) the reaction accorded to some bright spark who came up with a 
> new idea and was ostracised for their pains. Plenty
> of that in organisational memetics survives to this day (Price, 1995). Put 
> another way is this the first example of the 'not
> invented here' syndrome?
> 
If one expands this analysis, it is interesting to note that each successive 
stone industry came ever faster in time :   
              Stone industry time line  
                                        Approximative
                          Beginning     End    Duration
Olduwan             2500000 500000     2000000
Abbevilian              1000000 400000       600000
Acheulean                 400000    150000       250000
Levalois                  150000      80000        70000
Mousterian                  80000     40000        40000
Aurigniacian              50000   20000        30000
Solutrean                   25000     15000        10000
Magdalenian           20000   10000        10000
Mesolithic                  10000       4000             6000
Neolithic                    5000       2000             3000
(Source: 
http://perso.club-internet.fr/ciavatti/evolution/histoire/homme/industri.htm 
if some one knows a more scientific publication on this subject, I would be 
glad to use it...)
I believe that the major difference between Homo Sapiens Sapiens and his 
predecessors Ergaster and before or even his cousin Neanderthal, and with that 
respect the difference of Neanderthal with his own predecessors, was a higher 
competence in imitation (Stamenof, Galese 2002). I have developed the idea of a 
typology of imitation capabilities according to the complexity of the model and 
the distance of the imitation from the model. A draft text on imitation, in 
English, is available on my website : 
(http://perso.wanadoo.fr/gilles.trehin.urville/quelques_idees_sur_les%20memes.
htm). 
The imitation capabilities of very early hominids must have been quite basic, 
mainly immediate imitation with very limited degree of freedom with the 
model. As brain capacities increased imitation skills must have become 
progressively more flexible, allowing for adaptation and invention. 
It is likely that early on, the modern man also imitated the stone splitting 
techniques of his predecessors, in particular the Acheulean type, improving 
slightly on them over time. Then, arriving in contact with the Neanderthal, 
borrowed from them the most advanced in this field: the Levalois techniques. 
I know this goes against the current view that it was likely that Neanderthal 
borrowed its advances stone splitting technique from Homo Sapiens Sapiens 
(Lewis-Williams 2002), but this view is quite in question these days, with a 
revised analysis of the Neanderthal capabilities (Arsuaga 2001, Baffier 1999, 
Jaubert 1999). It is thus possible, on the contrary, that meeting with Neanderthal 
could have been initially the basis for enrichment of Homo Sapiens Sapiens, 
this last one taking advantage from the longer semi sedentary culture of the 
Neanderthal which had enabled tools refinments.  
The great difference between Homo Sapiens Sapiens and his Neanderthal cousin 
was probably residing in an even greater freedom in the imitation of the 
gestures of their models, allowing them more quickly to improve the techniques and 
the tools.
Paul Trehin
J. L. Arsuaga, "Le Collier de Néandertal, nos ancêtres à l'ère glaciaire", 
Odile Jacob, 2001, 344 p
D. Baffier, "Les derniers Néandertaliens, le Châtelperronien", La maison des 
roches, Paris 1999
J. Jaubert, "Chasseurs et artisans du Moustérien", La Maison des Roches, 
Paris 1999
D. Lewis-Williams, "The Mind in the Cave", Thames & Hudson, London 2002
M. Stamenov, V. Gallese, "Mirror Neurons and the Evolution of Brain and 
Language", Advances in Consciousness Research 42, 2002. viii, 392 pp
===============================================================
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri 13 Feb 2004 - 22:00:31 GMT