What do you think?
Rate this book
Becoming Human: Evolution and Human Uniqueness
In Becoming Human, noted anthropologist and renaissance man Ian Tattersall explores what makes us uniquely human, the qualities that set us apart from our ancestors, and the significance of our knowledge. A worldwide tour of discovery, Tattersall takes the reader from 30,000-year-old cave paintings in France and anthropological digs in Africa, to examining human behavior in a New York restaurant. And by offering wisdom gleaned from fossil remains, primate behavior, prehistoric art, and archaeology, Tattersall presents a stunning picture of where humankind evolved, how Darwin's theories have changed, and what we reliably know about modern-day human's capacity for love, language, and thought. Widely praised in the media, and an Amazon.com Top-10 bestseller, Becoming Human is an amazing trip into the past and into the future.
272 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1998
10 people are currently reading
870 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews
June 8, 2022
This book was published in 1998, which is a long time ago in the fast-moving field of paleoanthropology, so I hesitated before checking it out. However, I like Ian Tattersall’s books, and decided I would take a chance on it. It turned out to be worth reading, because much of the book focuses on the big picture of how we became the humans we are today, which is not likely to be overturned by new developments in the field. Even the parts which are out of date based on current scholarship are worthwhile for the light they shed on the experts’ evolving ideas of our relationships with humanity’s distant ancestors.
The key characteristics which make humans different from all our relatives, living and dead, are physiological, social, and mental. The causal factors behind them are climate change, migrations that isolated certain populations, walking upright, and the ability to master fire, which allowed meat to be cooked, increasing its nutritional value and providing an energy surplus that led to larger brains. Bigger brains, in turn, allowed for more complex social behaviors such as improved weapons (stone-tipped spears instead of sharp sticks), and a more sophisticated ability to coordinate complex behaviors such as hunting. These, along with modifications to the larnyx, paved the way for speech. The nightly campfire was more than just a safety feature to keep wild animals away; it also facilitated group social developments such as storytelling, teaching, and the creation of myths which coalesced into religions.
Since this book was published the scholarly opinion about Neanderthals’ mental capabilities has changed significantly. They now seem to have been much closer to Homo sapiens than was previously thought, with an ability for speech and symbolic thought. If you are of European ancestry about 1.5% of your genome comes from the Neanderthal lineage, so interbreeding was clearly possible. There are, however, still important differences, some of them the result of indirect and circumstantial evidence, such as the fact that Neanderthal bones show far more damage than contemporary human ones. The fact that many of the broken bones were healed indicates that they had a social organization sufficiently advanced to take care of their injured, but it also seems to indicate a more primitive hunting style, where the hunters had to get within stabbing range of large, angry animals. An alternative could have been the atlatl, or spear-thrower, which could launch attacks from up to 100 meters away, though it was most accurate when used at shorter ranges. It has been attested in H. sapiens sites as far back as 30,000 years ago, and it may be much older, but there is no evidence Neanderthals ever used it.
Ian Tattersall is a strong proponent of the Out of Africa hypothesis. In it Homo erectus is believed to have evolved from H. habilis about two million years ago, and several H. erectus migrations from Africa are known from the fossil record, one of which, about 600,000 years ago, gave rise to the Neanderthals and Denisovans (who were unknown when this book was written) and possibly other species that exist today as ghosts in our genome. H. sapiens evolved from the African branch of H. erectus about 300,000 years ago and 50,000 years ago one group of them led the great migration west into Europe, north into Siberia, and east into Asia. Out of Africa is still, without a doubt, the dominant theory supported by most paleoanthropologists. There is a minority opinion, however, the multi-regional hypothesis, which has some archaeological evidence to support it. Madelaine Böhme’s 2020 book Ancient Bones discusses the theory for a general reading audience.
Tattersall is also a proponent of a critical mass theory of consciousness. Our closest cousins, the chimpanzees and bonobos, show impressive mental abilities, including tool use and complex social behaviors. They are however, very different from humans, particularly in their ability to use symbolic thinking. Part of this is no doubt because of the physical limitations imposed by a brain of only about 450 cm3 (about the same as our Australopithecine ancestors five million years ago), while in modern humans it is around 1400 cm3.
What caused the dramatic increase in humans, with all its attendant consequences? Tattersall believes in the punctuated equilibrium model proposed, in its modern form, by Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge. It says that stable environments evolve animals which are ideally suited for them, so there are no ecological pressures that would give survival and reproductive advantages to the kind of minor mutational differences that evolution produces. Two things, however, could cause rapid evolutionary changes, one of which is a population that gets isolated from the rest of its species, so that whatever random mutations were originally present in it, and which otherwise would have been merged back into its larger parent population, get passed down and enhanced if they are beneficial, leading eventually to new species.
The other possibility is an external environmental change, such as early humans faced when East Africa went through wet and dry cycles in what was geologically very quick succession. Under such situations evolution would favor even minor changes so long as they helped improve survival chances. It is possible that under these environmental pressures larger brains, with their greater cognitive and social capacities, might have been selected for, and if a slightly larger brain has advantages, an even larger one has even more, and so on. Our chimpanzee relatives, safe in their jungle forests, did not face similar pressures, and had no reason to evolve larger brains.
Eventually, as brains got larger and more sophisticated, a threshold was crossed and one of the Homo species, probably H. erectus, gained an ability for abstract thought, speech, complex social arrangements, and much more. It has been a long, strange trip to the present, and while modern humans have much to be proud of in our achievements, it is a sobering thought to consider that all of our progress and sophistication may have been the result of random changes in weather patterns millions of years ago. A bit of humility is definitely called for.
The key characteristics which make humans different from all our relatives, living and dead, are physiological, social, and mental. The causal factors behind them are climate change, migrations that isolated certain populations, walking upright, and the ability to master fire, which allowed meat to be cooked, increasing its nutritional value and providing an energy surplus that led to larger brains. Bigger brains, in turn, allowed for more complex social behaviors such as improved weapons (stone-tipped spears instead of sharp sticks), and a more sophisticated ability to coordinate complex behaviors such as hunting. These, along with modifications to the larnyx, paved the way for speech. The nightly campfire was more than just a safety feature to keep wild animals away; it also facilitated group social developments such as storytelling, teaching, and the creation of myths which coalesced into religions.
Since this book was published the scholarly opinion about Neanderthals’ mental capabilities has changed significantly. They now seem to have been much closer to Homo sapiens than was previously thought, with an ability for speech and symbolic thought. If you are of European ancestry about 1.5% of your genome comes from the Neanderthal lineage, so interbreeding was clearly possible. There are, however, still important differences, some of them the result of indirect and circumstantial evidence, such as the fact that Neanderthal bones show far more damage than contemporary human ones. The fact that many of the broken bones were healed indicates that they had a social organization sufficiently advanced to take care of their injured, but it also seems to indicate a more primitive hunting style, where the hunters had to get within stabbing range of large, angry animals. An alternative could have been the atlatl, or spear-thrower, which could launch attacks from up to 100 meters away, though it was most accurate when used at shorter ranges. It has been attested in H. sapiens sites as far back as 30,000 years ago, and it may be much older, but there is no evidence Neanderthals ever used it.
Ian Tattersall is a strong proponent of the Out of Africa hypothesis. In it Homo erectus is believed to have evolved from H. habilis about two million years ago, and several H. erectus migrations from Africa are known from the fossil record, one of which, about 600,000 years ago, gave rise to the Neanderthals and Denisovans (who were unknown when this book was written) and possibly other species that exist today as ghosts in our genome. H. sapiens evolved from the African branch of H. erectus about 300,000 years ago and 50,000 years ago one group of them led the great migration west into Europe, north into Siberia, and east into Asia. Out of Africa is still, without a doubt, the dominant theory supported by most paleoanthropologists. There is a minority opinion, however, the multi-regional hypothesis, which has some archaeological evidence to support it. Madelaine Böhme’s 2020 book Ancient Bones discusses the theory for a general reading audience.
Tattersall is also a proponent of a critical mass theory of consciousness. Our closest cousins, the chimpanzees and bonobos, show impressive mental abilities, including tool use and complex social behaviors. They are however, very different from humans, particularly in their ability to use symbolic thinking. Part of this is no doubt because of the physical limitations imposed by a brain of only about 450 cm3 (about the same as our Australopithecine ancestors five million years ago), while in modern humans it is around 1400 cm3.
What caused the dramatic increase in humans, with all its attendant consequences? Tattersall believes in the punctuated equilibrium model proposed, in its modern form, by Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge. It says that stable environments evolve animals which are ideally suited for them, so there are no ecological pressures that would give survival and reproductive advantages to the kind of minor mutational differences that evolution produces. Two things, however, could cause rapid evolutionary changes, one of which is a population that gets isolated from the rest of its species, so that whatever random mutations were originally present in it, and which otherwise would have been merged back into its larger parent population, get passed down and enhanced if they are beneficial, leading eventually to new species.
The other possibility is an external environmental change, such as early humans faced when East Africa went through wet and dry cycles in what was geologically very quick succession. Under such situations evolution would favor even minor changes so long as they helped improve survival chances. It is possible that under these environmental pressures larger brains, with their greater cognitive and social capacities, might have been selected for, and if a slightly larger brain has advantages, an even larger one has even more, and so on. Our chimpanzee relatives, safe in their jungle forests, did not face similar pressures, and had no reason to evolve larger brains.
Eventually, as brains got larger and more sophisticated, a threshold was crossed and one of the Homo species, probably H. erectus, gained an ability for abstract thought, speech, complex social arrangements, and much more. It has been a long, strange trip to the present, and while modern humans have much to be proud of in our achievements, it is a sobering thought to consider that all of our progress and sophistication may have been the result of random changes in weather patterns millions of years ago. A bit of humility is definitely called for.
February 28, 2022
Fascinating, clear coverage of evolution and human uniqueness. He has a low opinion of evolutionary psychology which I don't 100% agree with but other than that minor quibble, it is an interesting read.
December 25, 2013
Tattersall's work is a fascinating exploration of human evolution and the separate species that led up to our own, as well as the true details which make us a unique species. Detailing anthropological discoveries from around the world, along with case studies and experiments related to primates and to psychology, Tattersall moves through the territory of human evolution in an engaging and approachable style. While some of the later chapters verge on being repetitive in some notes from the early broader chapters, and in some cases go into more detail than the average reader might prefer, the work as a whole is worthwhile and readable. Whether the material here is wholly new to readers or somewhat familiar, there's bound to be material here that is worth note and reflection for nearly any reader.
Recommended for any interested party.
Recommended for any interested party.
July 1, 2011
Readable book about the human animal, its primate cousins, distant and not so distant ancestors. Why did our species make it and the Neanderthals fail? Why are we so much better at using tools and more linguistically talented than our nearest primate relatives or any one else? May be a bit our of date--written 13 years ago, that's is a long time in the sciences--but so engagingly written and a great starting point for exploring the place of homo sapien on the evolutionary tree
July 28, 2010
A little dated (what with new research turning up human ancestors every day it seems, and with new research suggesting ape-like body styles are a new adaptation, not an old one), and sometimes dry.
Still, it's a masterful treatment of the subject. Well worth the read.
Still, it's a masterful treatment of the subject. Well worth the read.
January 5, 2016
This was an interesting read. They chose related articles. It wasn't mind blowing but was worth reading if you like evolution. After learning more about human evolution, I feel like they could have chosen better topics.
February 13, 2021
An elegantly written summary of the history of human evolution - Tattersall's writing is entertaining as well as erudite. However, the book was written in 1998, so it misses recent updates in the field. For example, the author highlights the differences between European early modern humans and Neanderthals, especially in mental and linguistic areas, and states that "...the magnitude of the physical differences between Neanderthals and moderns make it highly unlikely that the two were capable of successful interbreeding." (p. 176). Of course now there is genetic evidence that this did in fact, happen.
He also emphasizes the struggle to exactly define and grasp what exactly makes us human, going so far as to state that "...Homo sapiens presents a bewildering variety that is next to impossible to boil down to a neat account of anything we could describe as the human condition..." (p. 198) and later concluding that "It is frustrating indeed to come to the end of our story and to have to admit that we have little idea as to exactly how, when, where, or why our extraordinary consciousness was acquired." (p. 233).
I think part of the problem is Tattersall's near complete dismissal of the field of evolutionary psychology, which he calls "an attractive but profoundly flawed approach to explaining human behavior" (p. 98) and says misleadingly that "we are not behavioral prisoners of our genes in the way that evolutionary psychologists would have us believe" (p. 224). The field of study still has its critics and controversies, as any field does, but when pursued rigorously, I think it's now generally accepted to show significant promise in its ability to shed light on why we act the way we do.
In spite of these concerns, the book is filled with pleasantly thoughtful philosophizing. Engaging uses of language along the lines of "One swallow doesn't make a summer..." (p. 148) - more likely to be found in a literary novel than popular science writing - add to the enjoyment of an already fascinating topic. Cleverly stylish and certainly a worthwhile read.
He also emphasizes the struggle to exactly define and grasp what exactly makes us human, going so far as to state that "...Homo sapiens presents a bewildering variety that is next to impossible to boil down to a neat account of anything we could describe as the human condition..." (p. 198) and later concluding that "It is frustrating indeed to come to the end of our story and to have to admit that we have little idea as to exactly how, when, where, or why our extraordinary consciousness was acquired." (p. 233).
I think part of the problem is Tattersall's near complete dismissal of the field of evolutionary psychology, which he calls "an attractive but profoundly flawed approach to explaining human behavior" (p. 98) and says misleadingly that "we are not behavioral prisoners of our genes in the way that evolutionary psychologists would have us believe" (p. 224). The field of study still has its critics and controversies, as any field does, but when pursued rigorously, I think it's now generally accepted to show significant promise in its ability to shed light on why we act the way we do.
In spite of these concerns, the book is filled with pleasantly thoughtful philosophizing. Engaging uses of language along the lines of "One swallow doesn't make a summer..." (p. 148) - more likely to be found in a literary novel than popular science writing - add to the enjoyment of an already fascinating topic. Cleverly stylish and certainly a worthwhile read.
March 23, 2021
A good primer for the lay person on human evolutionary history. There are other subjects in this short book, which may be akin to a few university lectures where the professor flits from topic to topic. The other subjects include cognition, consciousness, the differences between apes and us, our capacity for art. All these are deep fields of knowledge which I assume Tatterstall knows enough about to have opinions on in his book.
In his last chapter about how Homo Sapiens have altered the natural world to a great degree, I found it curious he didn't mention climate change. By 1998, the date of the book's publication, it had been well scientifically established and popularly known. Oh well.
I liked that the author wasn't afraid to frequently say we just don't know many things. The idea of language and symbolic thinking being the main drivers of our qualitative uniqueness compared to other animals and our hominid descendants is fascinating and worth exploring.
In his last chapter about how Homo Sapiens have altered the natural world to a great degree, I found it curious he didn't mention climate change. By 1998, the date of the book's publication, it had been well scientifically established and popularly known. Oh well.
I liked that the author wasn't afraid to frequently say we just don't know many things. The idea of language and symbolic thinking being the main drivers of our qualitative uniqueness compared to other animals and our hominid descendants is fascinating and worth exploring.
June 4, 2017
Another great story from Tattersall. Published in 1998 so just a touch dated.
January 1, 2023
Excellent. Read this a couple of years ago. Forgot to log, apparently.
May 10, 2014
The beautiful and the ugly about human animals
Tattersall gives us primitive social history; a bounded evolutionary history; and a most surprising – though distressing – anatomical history of these expensive organs we carry about in our skulls. Expensive because they consume over 20% of our calories whether we use them or not. Given the state of civilization and politics it may be no surprise we burn hardly more calories when thinking than asleep.
The goal here is to find why humans are different. Chimps make tools, dolphins have the largest brain-to-body-mass ratio of any species on earth, Neanderthal ceremonially buried their dead, gorillas can be taught sign language, baboons engage in deception as they attribute states of mind to others to predict their behavior. Jane Goodall even witnessed bands of chimps make coordinated war on each other not so unlike the way humans did in earnest once accumulations from the agriculture revolution gave us something serious to kill for. But others have not painted cave walls in southwest Europe (30000ya), wrote sonnets or split atoms. As far as we know, claims Tattersall, a dramatic difference is rule based, abstract language. Arbitrary sounds associated to objects (the sound “house” only means “house” to those who speak English) or more intangibly, to symbolic references – mathematics, metaphysics, democracy. The order of these arbitrary sounds convey their own meaning. “Man paints house.” “House paints man.” Hence the rules – grammar – such that listeners using the same code understand correctly the intended message. Without the rules and vocabulary, a foreign tongue - if you’ve ever heard one - sounds like one continuous modulated word.
Throughout the book we wonder if we are really better off now than in the harsh, survivalist past. Through success in controlling the environment, our ancestors could have never imagined to what ends we would carry this emergent property of stellar byproducts structured in the form of brains. This control also allowed for an art explosion – according to Tattersall an element of existence central to ancient man. While the system we moderns created makes art alien and impractical – or worse, creates “modern art” – the past allowed our ancestors to explore this innately human characteristic. Gould’s punctuated equilibrium seems to apply here to human innovation as readily as it does to speciation – periods of abrupt development followed by periods of stasis.
Of utmost importance is Tattersall’s note on climate’s affect on the human trajectory. The coordination of climate change and human creative behavior may seem obvious (stated again some years later in Spencer Wells', Pandora's Seed) – e.g. if it’s suddenly colder, invent a coat. But we find, for example, that cave painting peaked with the last glacial maxima. Did selective pressures, including the loss of once available prey animals, expand the perception of art as magic over animals imaged? That is, did a natural ice age select for accelerating abstractions such as religion - the calling of powers to calm a changing world? (Given Neanderthal burials, the ice age was far from the first such hypothetical natural selection of behaviors.) Interestingly these paintings are composed of fewer large predators over time. Were the painters simply reporting the numbers – eliminated by climate change or human success in the competition game?
An excellent section on brain anatomy clarifies our biggest problem. The combination of onion-like layering and expansion of existent features to make up those layers, resulting in the untidy evolution of our brains built over early versions all the way back to common mammal, even reptilian-like ancestors. The sad news is that structure implies behavior. Our higher thought centers are mediated by sections in charge of our lowest functions – feeding, fighting, fleeing, sex. Is this why males so frequently compromise themselves for females against better judgments, rationalizing irrational acts, only to suffer their actions after hormones fade? Males of many species die in that contest. That fabulous machine in our skulls is also a mess and far from an ideal design. It makes us warlike, yet compassionate, lawyers, yet artists. We’re stuck with it and as Tattersall tells it, this, contrary to modern historians, is why history repeats itself.
Tattersall gives us primitive social history; a bounded evolutionary history; and a most surprising – though distressing – anatomical history of these expensive organs we carry about in our skulls. Expensive because they consume over 20% of our calories whether we use them or not. Given the state of civilization and politics it may be no surprise we burn hardly more calories when thinking than asleep.
The goal here is to find why humans are different. Chimps make tools, dolphins have the largest brain-to-body-mass ratio of any species on earth, Neanderthal ceremonially buried their dead, gorillas can be taught sign language, baboons engage in deception as they attribute states of mind to others to predict their behavior. Jane Goodall even witnessed bands of chimps make coordinated war on each other not so unlike the way humans did in earnest once accumulations from the agriculture revolution gave us something serious to kill for. But others have not painted cave walls in southwest Europe (30000ya), wrote sonnets or split atoms. As far as we know, claims Tattersall, a dramatic difference is rule based, abstract language. Arbitrary sounds associated to objects (the sound “house” only means “house” to those who speak English) or more intangibly, to symbolic references – mathematics, metaphysics, democracy. The order of these arbitrary sounds convey their own meaning. “Man paints house.” “House paints man.” Hence the rules – grammar – such that listeners using the same code understand correctly the intended message. Without the rules and vocabulary, a foreign tongue - if you’ve ever heard one - sounds like one continuous modulated word.
Throughout the book we wonder if we are really better off now than in the harsh, survivalist past. Through success in controlling the environment, our ancestors could have never imagined to what ends we would carry this emergent property of stellar byproducts structured in the form of brains. This control also allowed for an art explosion – according to Tattersall an element of existence central to ancient man. While the system we moderns created makes art alien and impractical – or worse, creates “modern art” – the past allowed our ancestors to explore this innately human characteristic. Gould’s punctuated equilibrium seems to apply here to human innovation as readily as it does to speciation – periods of abrupt development followed by periods of stasis.
Of utmost importance is Tattersall’s note on climate’s affect on the human trajectory. The coordination of climate change and human creative behavior may seem obvious (stated again some years later in Spencer Wells', Pandora's Seed) – e.g. if it’s suddenly colder, invent a coat. But we find, for example, that cave painting peaked with the last glacial maxima. Did selective pressures, including the loss of once available prey animals, expand the perception of art as magic over animals imaged? That is, did a natural ice age select for accelerating abstractions such as religion - the calling of powers to calm a changing world? (Given Neanderthal burials, the ice age was far from the first such hypothetical natural selection of behaviors.) Interestingly these paintings are composed of fewer large predators over time. Were the painters simply reporting the numbers – eliminated by climate change or human success in the competition game?
An excellent section on brain anatomy clarifies our biggest problem. The combination of onion-like layering and expansion of existent features to make up those layers, resulting in the untidy evolution of our brains built over early versions all the way back to common mammal, even reptilian-like ancestors. The sad news is that structure implies behavior. Our higher thought centers are mediated by sections in charge of our lowest functions – feeding, fighting, fleeing, sex. Is this why males so frequently compromise themselves for females against better judgments, rationalizing irrational acts, only to suffer their actions after hormones fade? Males of many species die in that contest. That fabulous machine in our skulls is also a mess and far from an ideal design. It makes us warlike, yet compassionate, lawyers, yet artists. We’re stuck with it and as Tattersall tells it, this, contrary to modern historians, is why history repeats itself.
August 23, 2011
I usually tend to focus on the *commonalities* between us and the other primates, but this is an interesting book describing the evolutionary history of humanity's *unique* attributes. Particularly, the modern vocal tract seems to have arisen as an exaptation for language; symbolism and true speech is shown to be one of the major dividing lines between us and our prehuman ancestors.
I appreciated the emphasis on the punctuated equilibrium model, which has the useful effect of decoupling the superficial link often posited between evolution and inevitable technological "progress". There was more stability than is generally supposed, and speciation events were more unique, driven by isolated (or quasi-isolated) populations. The other primates are not "failed humans" who neglected to grasp the ladder of evolution which would lead inexorably to homo sapiens - though we share a common ancestor, they were shaped by environmental factors which were distinct from our own.
I was surprisingly let down by the last - rather polemical - major chapter, "Becoming Human." His analysis of religion, in particular, is very weak, based as it is on his dependence on a transcendent Neoplatonic conception of an abstract incorporeal deity existing outside and "higher" than nature and the material universe. We Mormons, of course, would reverse the entire premise: we *are* capable of envisioning God, because He is a human like us, who did not create all existence instantaneously and simultaneously from nothing, but rather organized worlds without number out of preexisting material according to law. Our Gods have been "resolutely anthropomorphic" because that's how we encountered them. Reproduction is not primitive or low, it is one way we are similar to Deity.
Still, a good read!
I appreciated the emphasis on the punctuated equilibrium model, which has the useful effect of decoupling the superficial link often posited between evolution and inevitable technological "progress". There was more stability than is generally supposed, and speciation events were more unique, driven by isolated (or quasi-isolated) populations. The other primates are not "failed humans" who neglected to grasp the ladder of evolution which would lead inexorably to homo sapiens - though we share a common ancestor, they were shaped by environmental factors which were distinct from our own.
I was surprisingly let down by the last - rather polemical - major chapter, "Becoming Human." His analysis of religion, in particular, is very weak, based as it is on his dependence on a transcendent Neoplatonic conception of an abstract incorporeal deity existing outside and "higher" than nature and the material universe. We Mormons, of course, would reverse the entire premise: we *are* capable of envisioning God, because He is a human like us, who did not create all existence instantaneously and simultaneously from nothing, but rather organized worlds without number out of preexisting material according to law. Our Gods have been "resolutely anthropomorphic" because that's how we encountered them. Reproduction is not primitive or low, it is one way we are similar to Deity.
Still, a good read!
May 7, 2008
I've been a little lax in posting, so am hoping to catch up a bit tonight. :) I finished reading Becoming Human: Evolution and Human Uniqueness by Ian Tattersall about three weeks ago. This book discusses aspects of human evolution and how people differ from our closest living relatives - chimpanzees, gorillas, and other living primates. The book also discusses the accomplishments of our now-extinct antecedants in a fair amount of detail.
Some of Tattersall's observations are far from original (e.g. the cave paintings at Lascaux are impressive), but others - to the typical layperson seem somewhat controversial at first glance (e.g. that chimps and gorillas can't communicate like people can and that sign language experiments have pretty much failed all around). As a layperson with (realistically) only basic knowledge about human evolution and very little knowledge about recent developments (the last 10-15 years) in anthropological research, I found this book a breath of fresh air. Tattersall challenges the body of "common knowledge" and in doing so forces the reader to confront his/her own prejudices about how humans developed and what makes us unique in the world.
Highly recommended for all laypersons with an interest in anthropology/human evolution. Anthro students used to reading journals in these fields are unlikely to find much new and will probably prefer something more technical. Very readable for the layperson, though. Very little jargon.
Some of Tattersall's observations are far from original (e.g. the cave paintings at Lascaux are impressive), but others - to the typical layperson seem somewhat controversial at first glance (e.g. that chimps and gorillas can't communicate like people can and that sign language experiments have pretty much failed all around). As a layperson with (realistically) only basic knowledge about human evolution and very little knowledge about recent developments (the last 10-15 years) in anthropological research, I found this book a breath of fresh air. Tattersall challenges the body of "common knowledge" and in doing so forces the reader to confront his/her own prejudices about how humans developed and what makes us unique in the world.
Highly recommended for all laypersons with an interest in anthropology/human evolution. Anthro students used to reading journals in these fields are unlikely to find much new and will probably prefer something more technical. Very readable for the layperson, though. Very little jargon.
January 15, 2015
This shelf is dedicated to some of the books that have influenced me as I wrote Makers of Fire. Some of these books did not necessarily influence the book directly, but in terms of general frameworks. Others offered particular ideas that ignited my imagination. Makers of Fire: The Spirituality of Leading from the Future
I took an online class with with Ian Tattersall, author of Becoming Human, on BandN University years ago
with this book as the text.
My own worldview incorporates evolutionary thinking
and that has always been a part of how I understand the world and read the biblical texts.
This book, along with others, started me on the path to the realization that, perhaps, we are still in the
process of becoming human.
I took an online class with with Ian Tattersall, author of Becoming Human, on BandN University years ago
with this book as the text.
My own worldview incorporates evolutionary thinking
and that has always been a part of how I understand the world and read the biblical texts.
This book, along with others, started me on the path to the realization that, perhaps, we are still in the
process of becoming human.
September 21, 2014
Something we forget about natural selection is that it is not a continual refining process that makes better, and better widgets. If a species is successful and widespread it will stay the way it is with little or no change. In short, nothing is perfect nor will it ever be. Instead what you find is episodic innovation where change occurs when a species is isolated and reduced to small numbers. This is when completely new species emerges. This book is a nice quick read on the evolutionary history of the hominid branch of primates. I like the parts about the early Cro-Magnons and Neanderthals particularly.
Read
March 24, 2008Tattersall recounts pretty much the same stuff as in his other books. One point he drives home is that people with bones that look just like ours have been around for over 100,000 years; but for the first 60,000 of those, they didn't really act like us. It's only in the last 40,000 years or so that we see artifacts that seem like modern people had made them: carvings, cave art, body ornamentation. Tattersall thinks that by 100,000 years ago our brain was pretty much as it is today, but something happened about 40,000 years ago that allowed the invention of language.
February 8, 2013
I would give Tattersall a "good", but not "excellent" rating for this book. When he discusses fossil evidence, he is so heavily nuanced that he almost says nothing at all. When he talks in generalities, I long for him to provide some facts to substantiate the conjectures. Usually a superb illustrator, in this book he has provided virtually none. On the plus side, he took on a challenging task, and worked hard to accomplish it.
I agree with him on many points that he makes.
Ralph Hermansen 9/7/06
I agree with him on many points that he makes.
Ralph Hermansen 9/7/06
April 7, 2012
This was well written and very interesting. I wish more was known about ancient hominids. The book is about what is known about the evolution of hominids. I was especially interested in the sections where Tattersall talks about how it looks as if neanderthals were not capable of speech.
March 28, 2010
Fun read for wider audiences, including material from primatology, paleontology, paleoanthropology and archeology.
Read
October 6, 2010An informative book. A brief survey of human evolution from the fossil record with a comparison to our cousins the apes. It is not overly technical and very readable.
July 5, 2012
A very good book, except for the silly and gratuitous dismissal of the Club of Rome's "Limits to Growth" study, which has been utterly vindicated.
January 31, 2013
The question of the relationship between Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal has moved forward, and I am very curious to read where it has led Tattersall since this book came out over a decade ago.
September 26, 2013
A good if not great book. I assume part of this may be that I came to it a decade late. Interesting comments on the human primate, however.
February 25, 2014
Skip it. Read Diamond's, "The Third Chimpanzee."
October 5, 2015
It may be a little outdated but is still a worthy read.
to-keep-reference
March 1, 2016Usado en Visión de Paralaje Pág.258
October 19, 2012
I loved this book
Want to read
June 4, 2018Aslan recommended this in "God: A Human History" and I've come across Tattersall in some of my other reading, so I figured it was time to get cracking.
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews