Page 193 - Flipping book The Adam Paradox Hypothesis - Second Edition.pdf

The Ādam Paradox Hypothesis 170
Harvard: Cognitive Niche Gradualism
At Harvard, scholars often describe human uniqueness as the outcome of
gradual adaptation — the “cognitive niche.
”
Steven Pinker, in The Language Instinct, insists:
“Language is no more a cultural invention than wings are for birds. It is a biological
adaptation to communicate information.
” (Pinker, 1994, p. 18)
Richard Wrangham pushes the story further back in Catching Fire:
“Cooking created humanity. By making food digestible, it freed time and energy, fueling the
growth of our large brains and the social complexity that followed.
” (Wrangham, 2009, p.
63)
Elizabeth Spelke adds developmental evidence:
“Infants everywhere are equipped with a small number of core knowledge systems — of objects,
numbers, and people. These ancient systems form the bedrock of uniquely human symbolic
cognition.
” (Spelke, 2007, p. 88)
The Harvard narrative is elegant: small adaptive steps accumulate into symbolic
thought. But the archaeological silence haunts it. If language was an inevitable
adaptation, why did anatomically modern humans remain largely mute of
symbols for over 200,000 years? Why did beads at Qafzeh vanish, ochre at
Pinnacle Point fade, engravings at Diepkloof stop?
Critique: Gradualism explains preparation, but it cannot explain ignition. APH
shows why: the genome was indeed prepared, but without infusion, sparks died.
Harvard stops at readiness; APH explains the leap.
The Australian Museum: Smoothing for the Public
In Sydney, the Australian Museum’s “Human Evolution” exhibit declares:
“By 100,000 years ago, humans were using symbols, burying their dead, and trading across
long distances.
” (Exhibit panel, 2019)