Re: Gould on Engels, 'mental supremacy' in evol. thought

[Adam Rose <adam@xxxxxxxx>]

Lisa writes:
>
> In addition, I would reject as unsupportable any attempt to
> reconstruct an evolutionary sequence or scenario in the absence of
> evidence!

I can't comment, since I'm not an expert.

However, Engels did provide a better account than Darwin's in one
respect without any concrete evidence : he says language developed
"when men had something to say to each other" ie after they had
started producing tools, whereas I have read that Darwin says
humans had developed language while they were still in the trees.

> All the speculation about which came first was thoroughly
> useless.  I don't see Engels' priority [following the biologist
> Haeckel] of the evolution of dextrous hands as any more sensible than
> the opposition's priority of brains.
>

Well, it puts Labour at the centre of account of the development of
the human species. Besides from memory, Engels says the first step
was coming down from trees, the second the evolution of the hand,
doesn't he ? Then the brain, language etc follow, and allow /
require further physical devlopment.

Surely there was some evolution of the hand and arm when it was
no longer required for bearing the entire weight of the animal ?

> Also, please note that Engels' language throughout the essay on human
> evolution is thoroughly Lamarckian.  This aspect of the work is a
> historically understandable mistake.
>

I'm only vaguely aware of Lamarck. He was more into smaller things
combining into bigger things of greater complexity, wasn't he ?

Could you say more about this ?

Thanks,
Adam.

Adam Rose
SWP
Manchester
UK

---------------------------------------------------------------


     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

     ------------------