[ This essay ONLY addresses changes from evolution we can/could still see in behavior and is researchable -- provable or disprovable. ]
Isn't it more than likely that evolutionary changes would come from changes in just what would be essentially necessary (that 'needed' to change), and that which is the most susceptible (easiest) to change?
If so, wouldn't it be LIKELY that cognitive developments could (and would) come from simple perceptual (perceptual/attentional) shifts? In an already-adaptive behavioral complex, what more would be needed to enable representation and cognitive developments?; why (or how for that matter) would there be more that is needed? Thus wouldn't it be likely that that which makes apes (including humans) notably unique is cognitive abilities (essentially representational abilities) largely resulting from just these*?
[(By the way, I believe humans have generalized some of the perceptual shifts, yielding our more general use of conceptual abilities; we may also have a additional partial stage and stage resulting from similar perceptual shifts.)]
* Footnote: Carlos Montemayor (with Harry H. Haladjian) has cogently argued for 2 distinct sorts of perception: while one type show effects both ways (from it and on it); the other sort shows only "bottom up" effects. It is among the latter that the perceptual shifts I hypothesize occurred AND occur. (Don't mix up the two or pretend there is just one 'perception'.) I propose talk of such changes from evolution we can actually see (and still see)!! The rest is mere story-telling.
Article A Human Ethogram: Its Scientific Acceptability and Importanc...
Article Perception and Cognition Are Largely Independent, but Still ...
You touched on a difficult question. The process of evolution of the Universe, Earth, Human. Single elements of a single process or independent changes. What is the basis of the process?
It is a pity that such an urgent issue does not attract the attention of Specialists.
Dear Jimmy Y. Zhong
I, for one, have never even considered any differences between races (EVER); I am quite confident that they are extraordinarily subtle to the extent to which they exist (but I would not be confident subtle differences do not exist at all -- but WAY too subtle to have any major social difference or specialized societal impact (nor enough to warrant any presumption whatsoever -- and most certainly not at this stage of our knowledge of psychology). I believe differences between males and females would be found stronger, that is: more likely, statistically speaking (but still showing huge overlaps in their performance curves). (I believe all I have just stated do have some statistical findings behind them, backing my qualitative summaries).
[ (Between you and me, though: I would not want to "take you on" in a math contest, statistically speaking.) ]
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology
- Cognitive Science