Review of Richard Leakey's book. Translation: Tamar Amit, Science Series, Masterpiece Books, Hed Artzi Publishing House, 155 pages, NIS 70
Yoel only
The name Leaky is undoubtedly still a magic trick. It is associated with impressive scientific discoveries in the field of human evolution, discoveries about romance, adventure, endless stubbornness and great perseverance. Leakey is the name of an English missionary family that settled in East Africa at the end of the last century. The exposure of the family in Kenya was so complete that the famous Bani - the paleontologist Lewis Leakey, Richard's father - was nicknamed "the white African". Against the background of all this, it is easy for him, for the book bearing the name Leaky, to become almost automatically a bestseller, even though the author himself has long since abandoned the field in which the book deals. His wife Miv is the one who makes the main contribution to this field today with her important discoveries. Indeed, it is difficult to get rid of the impression that the aura surrounding the family's name is well used. This book, written as if by hand, is added to a series of books of a similar level that he wrote.
True, every topic in the sciences can be presented at different levels of detail. However, the simplicity of the book, I suspect, does not stem from a deliberate attempt to make it accessible and understandable to the general public. On the back cover page we are sensationally informed that the author has discovered the reason for our being human beings, the reason for our being intelligent, with a developed mind, a sort of gospel, "original and surprising in its simplicity", which until now, so to speak, has disappeared from our sight. Everything, it is claimed, stems from our walking on two feet. First, this is not a new idea at all. It has been in the morning news, in fact since the days of Darwin himself. But beyond that, it is not true at all. What's more: this hypothesis, strangely enough, is hardly discussed in the book. The author does indeed discuss the form of bipedal movement and even the possible reasons that led to its adoption, but from this point to seeing it as the source of our true uniqueness, "our big brain", there is no justification.
Several hominid branches, from those that did not evolve into today's man but existed at the same time, inherited the feature of walking on two feet from the ancient ancestor - upright - common to all, without becoming modern humans, not to mention the chicken we know, which also walks on two feet, and many other creatures who independently adapted the same form of mobility. All of them existed for hundreds of thousands of years and even millions of years without this increasing the volume of their brains to the dimensions of the mind of modern man, teaching us that there is no necessary connection between the two. How captive we are in the supposed necessary connection between height and the development of intelligence can be learned from the spectacle of the "intelligent" aliens in science fiction movies, who are almost always described as creatures that walk upright, similar to modern humans.
It is obvious that "...without the transition to walking on two feet they (our ancestors
The ancients) could not have been made like us" (p. 24). But see
Is this a condition? This, by the way, is exactly the obstacle that led to the well-known stumbling of
Darwin, who saw before his eyes an almost built-in positive feedback that existed
As if between walking upright (freeing the hands to create
tools), increase in brain volume, progress in the ability to produce tools and repeats
God forbid.
Long after Darwin, his mistake became clear. It turned out that even our direct ancestors,
Already walking upright, their brain volume was too small to be able to create tools.
Millions of years passed before the first hominid appeared whose mind was large
Big enough to allow the creation of tools, even the most primitive of them. the reference
The unit for that guaranteed illumination is formulated as follows: "...to walk on two was
Evolutionary potential (…) great (…) by freeing the limbs
The superiors so that one day they can take care of the dishes."
In the wording "so that they can one day" the author is obviously referring to the concept of the machine
Pre-adaptation, a loaded concept that describes the appearance of a certain trait only
In the future it will be used. Philosopher Daniel Dent already wondered about this,
And rightly so - is there anything special or unexpected about it? Nothing is true
In relation to each and every feature? any adaptation,
After all, it is a modification of a structure that already existed in the past. thought,
For example, on the upper limb, which becomes a wing in birds. In conclusion, it still is
It's just a case - not a condition - that the free hands and brain are tied today
plunder.
The brain could have developed if indeed the creature was required to develop it even without it
May the hands be free. The naive and simple ladder school is this
The guide to the author in the organization of his book. According to this school of thought, the human species
Arranged in the course of evolution one behind the other as the ends of a straight ladder,
stretching from the past to the present. Another school of thought stands against it, the one that sees the
The development of the animal world as a multi-branch discourse. Evolution, according to this school of thought,
It is expressed not in the transition of a stage by stage, but in the splitting of a branch
From a branch, in a manner reminiscent of the shape of a bush. the various branches of the discourse
may, theoretically, continue to coexist, even up to the present, as well
If one was the father of the other.
The findings in the field unquestionably support the second school, and the author of the book
Failed - in my opinion - by not presenting things this way. Homo habilis,
The "father-birth" of Homo erectus continued to exist at the same time as the "originator".
His loins", and the latter continued to exist at the same time as his descendants (homo
sapiens), and so on. All this is contrary to the impression obtained from reading the book.
The species of the genus Homo, according to Leakey's version, did not become extinct. They passed - all
One in turn - transformation, a change in which one species disappears thereby
who became another
It is interesting that other hominid species, those called Australopithecus,
who lived at the same time as our ancestors, do not receive similar treatment from Leakey's side. goddess
do branch off into parallel branches. His special attitude wins a branch
Our development is an echo of a well-known tradition in the study of man, according to which the branch is awarded
Which leads us to a "humane" treatment than that which other groups receive, a treatment of
unique and special, which does not recognize the simultaneous existence of multiple belonging species
to the branch of human development. Another expression for his special treatment is a branch winner
The development of man is the extension of the existence of Homo (Sapiens) to the depths
Extreme time. This concept is particularly interesting, because it is an expression
For an old British evolutionary concept that has lost its cool (the fake
The famous one known as the Piltdown Skull is the brainchild of her
the conception). Richard's father - Lewis - was among the most prominent
whose supporters
It is not clear how far Leakey wants to extend-deepen the branch of development of
gay, and the scientific rationale behind this claim is not entirely clear. in addition to
A discussion of what is happening to the human species from an evolutionary point of view, interwoven in the text
Juicy descriptions that are hard to avoid grinning while reading them, even if it is
In a popular book intended for the general public. One of the colorful ones is description
The daily life of a group of hominids (Homo erectus), a description based on it
According to the author about rich archaeological finds: "Afterwards convincing
The girl... you are one of the women to show her again how to make stone tools.
With great patience, the woman slams two flint stones together with a sharp blow
and quick. A perfect splash flies through the air. With great determination the girl tries to imitate her
Without success... the girl tries again and this time her movement is slightly different. sharp shard
It splashed from the stone and a cry of victory erupted from the girl's mouth. she catches the splash,
Showing it to the smiling woman and then wanted to show it to her friends..." and more
A priestess and a priestess.
These descriptions and many others found in the book are of the kind that justify to a degree
The criticism of the historian Misia Landau, who claims that there is no
In the field of biology, there is another branch of research where "narrative" stories are baseless
Facts dominate it as much as in physical anthropology (research
the development of man).
Now, after what seems to be the fulfillment of my duty in the review, it is possible to turn to his sides
The more positive ones of the book, of which there are quite a few. Paradoxically, they will enjoy
It is read by both professionals in the field and laymen. The professionals, mainly
Those who are interested in the history of this field of study will find
There is a lot of interest in the book, especially in what is hidden between the lines. Because there is
Remember: the author was close to his parents' desk since childhood
the known His friction with all those important professionals attracted first
to his parents' discoveries (and then to his own discoveries, which are even more important)
provided him with a unique opportunity: the great researchers and lecturers in the field
Man's evolution served, quite literally, as his private tutors as he spent
in their midst. Their activity in the field and even more than that the long conversations into
Tonight in the long evenings that marked the routine of those days - they gave
He, despite having no formal academic education, has a single diploma
in Mina
This reality also makes him a first-hand witness to scientific controversies
and diverse personalities, to specific worldviews and prejudices,
All of which serve as a very important background in understanding the various interpretations of
the fossils themselves. This important information is difficult to resist under the circumstances
other than those described above. On the other hand, as mentioned, due to this reality he succeeds
The author brings in his book a less formal and comprehensive review that is worth every soul, if
Because it is simplistic to the core, of the spectrum of different opinions and arbitrary thoughts
currently. And even though Likki puts himself without special justification as the arbiter
I am authoritative for the tribe or for the grace of this or that opinion, the review is broad, representative
And in general also fair.
https://www.hayadan.org.il/BuildaGate4/general2/data_card.php?Cat=~~~349713920~~~51&SiteName=hayadan
