The science

A new species of humans was discovered 50 km from Johannesburg in South Africa and was named " discovery of the century".

Scientists say this discovery will change our understanding of human ancestors. In total, more than 1,500 bone pieces were found in Africa, belonging to at least 15 individuals, ranging from children to the elderly.

The new species was named Homo naledi and belongs to the genus Homo, to which modern humans belong. Wherein naledi means "star" in Sesotho, one of the official languages ​​of South Africa.

New species of man

Researchers describe representatives of this species as slender, with a small brain, long legs and awkward. The men were approximately 1.52 meters tall, while the women were slightly shorter. The average weight reached 45 kilograms.

Examination of the bones suggests that these creatures were an interesting mixture of ancient apes and features of modern humans.

The brain was the size of a small orange. The teeth were simple and small. The chest is primitive and ape-like, however, their arms are more modern, and their shape is well suited for the manufacture of basic tools.

The feet and ankles are designed for bipedalism, but the fingers are curled, which can be found in primates that spend a lot of time in trees.

Scientists cannot yet say how long ago these creatures lived, but they suggest that they may be the first of their kind ( Homo) and could have lived in Africa about 3 million years ago.

The discovery was made by specialists from University of the Witwatersrand, National Geographic Society And South African Science and Technology Authority.

"With almost every bone in the body having been represented many times, Homo naledi is the most famous fossil member of our lineage," said Lee Berger, a paleoanthropologist who led two expeditions that discovered the new species.

Types of ancient people

The first discovery was made in 2013 in the Rising Star cave., located in what is known as the Cradle of Humankind, a World Heritage Site.

Two expeditions were organized in November 2013 and March 2014. The fossils lay about 90 meters from the cave entrance, which was accessible only through a narrow chute only 18 cm wide.

The remains were studied by more than 50 scientists and researchers in May 2014.

Scientists believe they have discovered a burial site. Representatives of Homo naledi appear to have carried their dead deep into the cave, perhaps over many generations.

If so, then this suggests that naledi were capable of ritual behavior and symbolic thinking, which was previously thought to be characteristic of later species of humans for the last 200,000 years.

Experts believe that the discovery of a new species that is such a mixture of modern and primitive traits should force scientists redefine what it means to be human.

Timeline of human evolution

Ardipithecus ramidus- 4.4 million years ago

The remains were discovered in Ethiopia in the 1990s. The pelvic bone indicates adaptation to tree climbing and walking upright.

Australopithecus afarensis ( Australopithecus afarensis) – 3.9 – 2.9 million years ago

The famous "Lucy" skeleton belongs to this species of human relatives. OS tanks of this type have so far been discovered only in eastern Africa. Skeletal features suggest that Australopithecus afarensis was an upright walker, but spent some time in the trees.

skillful man ( Homo habilis) - 2.8-1.5 million years ago

This human relative had a larger braincase and smaller teeth than Australopithecus and other species, but retained primitive features such as long arms.

Homo naledi(age unknown - about 3 million years)

The new species has small, modern teeth, human-like feet, but more primitive fingers and a small skull.

Erectus or Homo erectus (Homo erectus) -1.9 million years – unknown

Erectus has a modern body build, which is almost no different from ours, but a smaller brain than a modern person combined with a more primitive face.

Neanderthal (Homo neanderthalensis) - 200,000 years - 40,000 years

Neanderthals were a lateral group of modern humans who inhabited western Eurasia before our species left Africa. They were short and strong compared to modern humans, but they had slightly larger brains.

Homo sapiens (Homo sapiens) – 200,000 years to present

Modern humans arose in Africa from a previous species known just like Homo heidelbergensis. A small group of Homo sapiens left Africa 60,000 years ago and settled in the rest of the world, replacing other species they encountered.

And they were replaced by a new species of “Homo sapiens”. These new people were the first people on Earth to have the same skull and overall body shape as modern humans. They were named Cro-Magnons, they were our immediate ancestors (for more details, see the article ““). Cro-Magnons lived in caves or huts at the very end of the last of the ice ages. In those days it was cold and winters were snowy; only short grasses and shrubs could grow in such conditions. Cro-Magnons hunted reindeer and woolly mammoths.

Hunting and fishing

The Cro-Magnons learned to make many new types of tools and weapons. They tied sharp points made of deer antler to their spears with teeth pointing backwards, so that the spear stuck deep in the side of the wounded animal. In order to throw spears as far as possible, they used special throwing devices. These devices were made from deer antler, and some of them were decorated with carved patterns. They caught fish using harpoons carved from deer antlers, with tips and barbs curved back. Harpoons were tied to spears, and fishermen pierced the fish directly with them.

Sewing

Needles carved from deer antler were found next to the remains of Cro-Magnons. This suggests that people have already learned to sew animal skins. The Cro-Magnons cut deer antlers using a chisel-shaped stone tool - a chisel (read also the article ““). They were probably the first people to learn how to make needles and sew. At one end of the needle they made a hole that served as an eye. Then they cleaned the edges and point of the needle by rubbing it against a special stone. Perhaps they pierced the skin with a stone drill so that they could thread a needle through the resulting holes. Instead of thread, they used thin strips of animal skin or intestines. Cro-Magnons often sewed small beads made of colorful stones onto their clothes to make them look more elegant. Sometimes for these purposes they also used shells with holes in the middle.

Ancient burial

Many burials have been discovered in the earthen floors of Cro-Magnon huts and caves. The skeletons were covered with beads made from stones and shells, previously attached to rotted clothing. The dead, as a rule, were placed in the grave in a bent position, with their knees pressed to their chin (see also the article ““). Sometimes various tools and weapons are also found in graves.

This is the skull of a Cro-Magnon woman. It has the same shape as the skulls of modern people, and has a capacious, rounded skull, a pointed chin and a straight forehead.

Huts made of mammoth bones

Some Cro-Magnon tribes lived on the cold steppe plains of Eastern Europe. There were no caves to live in and not enough wood to build huts. However, the woolly mammoths they hunted provided them with almost everything necessary for life (read also the article ““). Cro-Magnons built huts from long shin bones and mammoth tusks, covering the frame with animal skins. The ends of the bones were inserted into the skulls because the builders could not stick them into the frozen ground. These Cro-Magnons wore pants and jackets made from mammoth skins. They ate mammoth meat and stored it in holes dug in the frozen ground.

How to make a caveman necklace

Cro-Magnons made necklaces from small stones and shells, fish bones or pieces of eggshells. They may also have worn beads made from seeds or grains of various fruits, but these have not been preserved in fossil form. Sea shells and pebbles often have small holes in the middle. If you happen to visit the sea, you can collect them and string them on a thread to make a necklace. You can also use a needle to poke small pieces of fresh eggshells. Thread them onto a cotton thread along with apple and orange seeds and you will have another necklace.

Each generation considers itself much cooler than all previous ones. After all, thanks to technological progress, it knows what was not known before, uses things that did not exist before, eats, drinks and consumes products and services that were invented quite recently. After all, you are a modern person, and they are already covered with the dust of time.

Then this generation becomes “obsolete”, and even more modern people come who believe that no one really lived before them, only this generation truly lives. So generation after generation passes, and they don’t really understand that everything that distinguishes one century from another is not so significant.

Even now, many imagine that technical progress, social progress began quite recently, and we are at its peak. And therefore we are, as it were, smarter, better than our ancestors, and therefore we have every right to not give a damn about their experience.

But maybe we are exaggerating the importance of technological progress? And we exaggerate precisely because we have become a consumer society, and the function of consumption has become perhaps the main task of man?

Of course, we have made huge strides in consumption. What about everything else?

Flickering effect

One of the misconceptions of modern man is that “the moral laws that were in effect a hundred or a thousand years ago no longer apply today.” Like, life has changed a lot since then, so the laws have changed.
Read more

The twenty-first century is just around the corner!

Social progress is in full swing! A modern person has to go to all the boutiques and salons to buy a flash card with two gigabytes more than he had a month ago, and an even tighter T-shirt, like Bilan’s...
Read more

Is there a future for consumer society?

Transcript of the lecture by the chairman of the All-Russian public organization “Round Table of Russian Business”, academician of the Academy of Security, Defense and Law Enforcement, arbitrator of the RSPP Commission on Corporate Ethics, lawyer Pyotr Mostovoy. The theme is modern man in the modern world of consumption.
Read more

The world of consumerism and the degradation of society

The financial structure of the modern world, which survives on its own, until (until everything collapses) increases the race of consumerism. From the point of view of the proposed theory of evolution, human communities (like all dynamic systems) strive for stability...

Let us note that today many scientists from this field believe that modern man has contradictory traits: on the one hand, he is the creator of the great achievements of our time, and on the other, an ordinary consumer who does not think about the need for self-development.

Of course, in every culture there are outstanding individuals who contribute to the development of progress, and also inactive people, but if we imagine modern man as a collective image, the picture certainly looks contradictory.

Modern man: the cult of success and morality

Today, representatives of different cultures have in common the desire to achieve success. It is interesting that people used to consider success the manifestation of heroism (period 50-200 years ago), the creation of strong family ties and the birth of healthy offspring, i.e. social realization without taking into account material benefits.

Now the measure of success (in most cases) is money, and the pursuit of it is sometimes aimed at the destruction of the environment, and sometimes even self-destruction.

We can say that spirituality, in the understanding of modern man, merges into a concept with one meaning, material, while previously people endowed them with great differences.

Nevertheless, society still attaches great importance to such concepts as mercy, kindness, and sympathy: this is indicated by various organizations created to provide material support to the poor.

Therefore, we can say that modern man is polar: one can find examples of both altruistic and selfish behavior.

and technology

Another distinctive feature of modern times is the accelerated pace of introduction of new technologies and devices. And this is what distinguishes the life of a modern young man; it is inextricably linked with technology.

Electronic devices have become of great importance for many modern people; they are becoming not only part of everyday life, but even forming one. One can only imagine a day without a computer and the Internet. Some people cannot organize their work without them, while others simply cannot find them, and yet turn to other technical devices: telephone, radio, TV. 200 years ago people existed without these devices, but now life without them would be very difficult.

Therefore, we can say that the life of modern people is very closely connected with technology, its quality largely depends on technical capabilities.

Modern man and the problem of freedom

Previously, the issue of freedom was not as pressing as it is now. A person has learned to defend his rights, appreciate expanded opportunities and respect the freedom of others. This is a positive feature of modernity: almost everyone is given the greatest possible freedom of development, which allows them to express their talents. This contributes to the development of progress and testifies to the humanity of the worldview. Equal rights are important and beneficial to society. And the fact that they have now been implemented is a positive feature of our time.

What should a modern person be like?

The historian and sociologist Boris Porshnev coined a concept called “neoanthrope,” by which he understood the type of person of the future, but he pointed out that its representatives can also be found today. This person has the following traits:

• free, not subject to the suggestion of others (developed self-awareness);
• abstract thinking, developed will and ability to suggest are used only for creative purposes;
• the desire for a life balance in society (absence of revolutions);
• kindness.

According to the scientist, such people will be able to lead society to prosperity and reduce the number of conflicts that have a destructive effect on all areas of life.

Modern man differed from all his ancestors, first of all, in the structure of the skull. The volume of the skull in modern humans averages 1440 cc in men and 1300 cc in women. As we can see, in terms of cranial volume, modern man even lags behind Neanderthal man, whose cranial volume reached 1900 cubic cm, and is slightly ahead of Archanthropus, whose maximum cranial volume reached average values ​​in modern man. Thus, the main difference was not the size of the skull, but its shape. According to anthropologist Pilbeam, we are talking about "different ways of packaging the same amount of brain tissue." But for the functioning of the human brain, it is not at all indifferent how it is “packed”, i.e. which departments are more developed and which are less developed. The skull of a modern person is higher, its arch is more rounded. This shape of the skull corresponds to the maximum development of the frontal and parietal parts of the brain, in which the so-called associative zones are located, responsible for the highest coordination of mental functions in humans.

What could have caused such important evolutionary changes in the structure of the skull? There are different opinions on this matter.

Some scientists believe that the reduction in the use of the front teeth as an additional tool - for example, to hold one end of the skin while processing it with a stone scraper - played an important role. As a result, the overall massiveness of the facial part of the skull may have decreased, and the entire skull may have become shorter. Since the volume of the brain did not change, the skull increased in height. Another point of view, which Pilbeam adheres to, links the change in the shape of the skull with the development of the pharynx as a resonating chamber necessary for articulate speech. The pharynx is attached to the base of the skull, which in modern humans is curved. Archanthropes and Neanderthals have a flatter skull base. As a result of the formation of the bend characteristic of the modern human skull, the entire skull changed its shape, becoming taller and shorter.

So, the first difference between the skull of modern man and the skulls of archanthropus and Neanderthal is that it has become shorter and taller, with a rounded back of the head and a distinct bend at the base.

The second important difference in the modern human skull is the absence of a continuous supraorbital relief - a “visor” - above the eye sockets, so characteristic of ancient hominids. Sometimes even in modern humans, the superciliary ridge can be very developed, but the superciliary ridges are never expressed along the entire length of the supraorbital margin, from one temple to the other, as was the case with archanthropes and classical Neanderthals.

The third difference in the modern human skull is the chin protuberance on the lower jaw. The chin protrusion is sometimes found even on archanthrope skulls, but these are isolated cases. Only in modern humans can the chin protuberance be considered a species characteristic characteristic of all neoanthropes. Fossil people of modern appearance, who were called Cro-Magnons, had all the characteristic features of the skull structure that are listed above.

The question arises: has there really been no change in the structure of the skull in 25 thousand years? Naturally, there were changes, but they were no longer of the nature of evolutionary transformations and did not affect the main species characteristics of the Homo sapiens skull. Over time, in all territories inhabited by humans, a process of shortening of the skull occurred. Anthropologists call this phenomenon epochal brachycephalization. The skull continued to acquire an increasingly rounded, harmonious shape. Sometimes this could mislead researchers, since later populations from the same area had a different skull shape than older populations. Hypotheses were made about migrations, the replacement of some peoples by others, but upon closer study it became clear that we are most likely talking about the process of epochal brachycephalization, in which descendants have shorter skulls than their ancestors.

An important feature of the Earth's population at that time was a different general anthropological diversity than now. Anthropologists cannot say exactly when exactly the modern human races arose. In some territories, racial characteristics go back to very ancient times, and it can be said with a high degree of confidence that local Neanderthals or even archanthropes took part in the formation of the modern population of these territories. In other cases, no continuity is observed. This situation is typical, for example, in Europe and Northern Asia. For some time after the appearance of modern humans here, scientists do not discover finds that would directly lead to the modern anthropological types of this territory. Finds from different regions of Europe and Northern Asia sometimes presented the most unexpected combinations of features. This suggests that modern races formed relatively recently, later than 25 thousand years ago, and in ancient times, among the populations of that time, there could have been some “races” of which we know nothing.

It is traditionally believed that the Cro-Magnons were tall, slender people with elongated proportions. This is true only for some populations of ancient people who lived in Europe, Western Asia and Africa. Many fossil groups were characterized by other body features. There are good reasons to believe that the entire diversity of constitutional types was formed even earlier, in the era of the Neanderthals. The exploration of arctic latitudes, high mountain regions and deserts by modern man has led to an increase in the adaptive morphological diversity of humanity as a whole.

7. Basic theories of anthropogenesis: evolutionism and creationism.

Anthropogenesis (from the Greek anthropos - man, genesis - development) - the process of development of modern man, human paleontology; a science that studies the origins of man and the process of his development. The number of theories about the origin of man is huge, but the main ones are two – the theories of evolutionism (which arose on the basis of the theories of Darwin and Wallace) and creationism (which arose on the basis of the Bible).

For about a century and a half, discussions have been raging between proponents of these two different theories in biology and natural science.

According to evolutionary theory, man evolved from apes. The place of man in the order of modern primates is as follows:

1) suborder of prosimians: sections lemuromorphic, lorimorphic, tarsimorphic;

2) suborder of anthropoids:

a) section of broad-nosed monkeys: family of marmosets and capuchins;

b) section of narrow-nosed monkeys:

Superfamily Cercopithecoidae, family Marmosetaceae (inferior narrow-nosed): subfamily of Marmosetaceae and slender-bodied;

Superfamily hominoids (higher narrow-nosed):

Family of gibbons (gibbons, siamangs);

Pongid family. Orangutan. African pongids (gorilla and chimpanzee) as the closest relatives of humans;

Hominid family. Man is its only modern representative.

8. Controversial aspects of evolutionary theory. Evolution and the second law of thermodynamics. The second law of thermodynamics is a physical principle that imposes restrictions on the direction of heat transfer processes between bodies. Clausius's postulate: “A process is impossible, the only result of which would be the transfer of heat from a colder body to which evolution supposedly violates the second law of thermodynamics, since with complication the entropy of the system must decrease.

An important and still unresolved question in science is the reconciliation of evolution and the second law of thermodynamics. Is it possible to reconcile the theory of universal evolution from inanimate matter to the spontaneous generation of living things and further through the gradual development of the simplest single-celled organisms into complex multicellular organisms and, ultimately, into man, in whom there is not only biological but also spiritual life, with the second law of thermodynamics, which Is it so universal in nature that it is called the law of growth of entropy (disorder), operating in all closed systems, including the entire Universe?

So far, no one has been able to solve this fundamental problem. The simultaneous existence of universal evolution and the law of entropy growth as universal laws of the material Universe (as a closed system) is impossible, since they are incompatible.

At first glance, it is natural to assume that macroevolution can take place locally and temporarily (on Earth). A number of current evolutionists believe that the conflict between evolution and entropy is resolved by the fact that the Earth is an open system and the energy coming from the Sun is quite sufficient to stimulate universal evolution over a vast geological time. But such an assumption ignores the obvious fact that the influx of thermal energy into an open system directly leads to an increase in entropy (and, consequently, to a decrease in functional information) in this system. And in order to prevent a huge increase in entropy due to the influx of large amounts of thermal solar energy into the earth’s biosphere, the excess of which can only destroy, and not build, organized systems, it is necessary to introduce additional hypotheses, for example, about such a biochemical information code that predetermines the course of the hypothetical macroevolution of the earth’s biosphere, and about such a global, complex conversion mechanism for converting incoming energy into work for the spontaneous emergence of the simplest reproducing cells and further movement from such cells to complex organic organisms that are still unknown to science.

9. Concepts of mono- and polycentrism of the emergence of man. (p.123)

Modern man: the problem of origin (mono- or polycentrism)

The questions of who is the ancestor of modern man and in what place he arose are closely related to each other. So, where and from whom? Having asked these questions, one cannot avoid one more thing, perhaps the most important one. What kind of person are we talking about? Indeed, if we mean the Cro-Magnons themselves, who replaced the Neanderthals in Western Europe, then this was only one group of ancient people of the modern type, although very numerous. If we talk about modern man as a whole, then the range of problems that are associated with this issue will be much wider. The oldest of these problems is the problem of monocentrism or polycentrism.

Monocentrism presupposes the existence of a single center where modern man arose and from where he then settled throughout the rest of the planet. For many years, the theory of monocentrism was defended by very large and authoritative scientists. Political motives were also mixed in with purely scientific considerations. The fact is that the opposite theory, polycentrism, while asserting the independent emergence of modern man in several centers, simultaneously postulated the independent emergence of human races. This statement, in turn, created a theoretical basis for racist constructions about “superior” and “inferior” races, about the racial inferiority of entire peoples, and justified discrimination on racial grounds. In an atmosphere of intense struggle against racist “theories,” proof of the origin of modern man in one region of the Earth meant at the same time proof of the unity of the origin of all modern races.

However, whatever the arguments of the monocentrists and whatever noble motives fuel their constructions, there are facts that this theory cannot explain in any way. First of all, this is data on the continuous continuity of the population over vast areas of the Earth that, according to the monocentrism hypothesis, were not included in the area of ​​the ancestral home of modern man. As is now known, both Asia and Europe were populated already at the archanthropic stage. There is no evidence that would indicate the sudden disappearance of the ancient population of these areas and their replacement by modern man. Such a “gradual gap” is observed, perhaps, only in Europe, between Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons. It was the existence of this gap that gave rise to the “Neanderthal problem” and numerous hypotheses about the fate of European Neanderthals.

If we imagine that modern man came out of somewhere in Africa and then very quickly populated the whole world, it remains completely unclear where the descendants of the local archanthropes and paleoanthropes went. It is difficult to admit that they all turned out to be outside of evolution and did not leave a trace on the modern population of the planet. In addition, there is a lot of evidence of a certain continuity between the ancient and modern populations of certain areas. For example, despite some differences, European Cro-Magnons in general still resemble Caucasians. On the territory of Asia, synanthropes already exhibit some morphological features that bring them closer to the Mongoloids: spade-shaped upper lateral incisors, small stature. Mongoloid features, although not very pronounced, are also found on later Upper Paleolithic skulls from Asia - on a male skull from the Upper Zhoukoudian Cave and a fragment of a skull from the lower horizon of the Afontova Gora site in Krasnoyarsk. The oldest Upper Paleolithic sites in Siberia, Malta and Buret, have been excavated not far from Irkutsk. The figurines found at these sites are also distinguished by Mongoloid features.

The continuity of anthropological characteristics of the population from antiquity to modern times can be traced on other continents. Finds have been made in Africa and Australia that indicate the very ancient roots of individual racial variants included in the large equatorial race. Thus, the prototype of the small Negro race can be considered a skull found in the Southern Sahara, not far from Fort Asselyar. In southern Africa, in the area of ​​Fish Hoek near Cape Town, a skull resembling a modern Bushman type was found. In the east of the African continent, in Kenya, near lake. Elmenteyt, skulls were discovered, the anthropological type of which is similar to the modern small Ethiopian race.

On the territory of Australia, in the localities of Talgai and Koguna, two very ancient skulls were discovered. These skulls are remarkable in that they are very archaic, but also have some features reminiscent of modern Australians.

All these data are quite difficult to explain from the standpoint of monocentrism, but they do not contradict the theory of polycentrism, which allows for the evolution of modern man and the simultaneous formation of human races throughout the inhabited territory of the Earth.

It must be said that now the debate between mono- and polycentricists has largely lost its severity. Scientific positions are brought closer together thanks to the deep penetration into the worldview of scientists of the genetic approach. Indeed, no matter how separated individual human populations may be, there is a constant exchange of genetic material between them. This exchange of genes occurs slowly, over many generations, but it is quite sufficient for humanity to maintain its species unity. Thus, at the stage of formation of modern man, as in previous eras, humanity developed under the influence of many factors, among which two opposing ones were constantly at work - the isolation of human populations from each other and mixing between them. These two processes, it would seem, should lead to directly opposite results. Under the influence of isolation, anthropological differences intensified, and as a result of mixing, they were smoothed out. If mixing occurred only at the borders of small human groups for a very long time and a high degree of isolation of populations was maintained, then the overall effect was the preservation of both the high diversity of humanity and its biological unity.

Related information.