0007 Newson and Richerson start their inquiry by asking, “What is it to be human?”
Does a scientific understanding of how our species evolved shed light on the question?
Scientists hope so. Recently, torrents of new information about human evolution has been coming from geneticists and natural historians, including researchers interested in understanding the adaptive natures of women and children. What were they up to during the past two million years?
Well, among other things, they were harnessing males to help them survive. Surely, the family is evolutionarily ancient. Plus, it complements mother-infant bonding.
0008 The new information does not further the notion of a gene-defined or an environment-based human nature. For example, neither genes nor environment do good jobs in predicting how children will turn out. One child may be resilient. One child may be delicate. Nevertheless, there are some consistencies. Children connect to mom and dad. Children connect to (and compete with) their siblings. In short, children belong in a family.
0009 What may seem strange to say, at this moment, is that the family (among other things) is a purely relational structure that can be diagrammed using the category-based nested form. Examples are found in A Primer on The Familyand The First and Second Primers on the Organization Tier, by Razie Mah, available at smashwords and other e-book venues.
0010 Imagine that.
Our genus adapts to the opportunities and dangers offered by purely relational structures.
As soon as one imagines the possibility, one recalls a story. Stories are tools for thinking about what might have happened in our evolutionary history. Archaeological evidence does not tell a story. Rather, evidence renders certain stories as plausible and others as implausible. So, the anthropologist’s task is to fashion a plausible story. In this book, the gray-colored interludes attempt to present plausible tales.
0011 How can one fashion a plausible story with archeological evidence at hand?
Evidence serves as real, tangible actualities2 that inquirers can place into the normal context of archaeology3 and over the potential of ‘something relevant’1.
What is relevant?
Well, a plausible story about us fits the bill.
If I follow the method in Razie Mah’s A Primer on the Category-Based Nested Form, I arrive at the following.
0012 Well, what about genetics?
Aren’t torrents of information about human evolution coming from genetics as well as natural history?
Okay, allow me to expand the picture.