The portmanteau word (contrived to represent the first A of the acronym EAVASIVE) is meant to be a reference to momentous (selective sweep causing) mutations that. That is, uniquely human mutations in our recent phylogeny made some new or enhanced environmental opportunity exploiting behavior or preoccupation (actention) possible while the same ambiadvantageous[ly adaptive] mutation also made it possible for CURSES (incurred by mutation-pioneering individuals) to be a source of co-motivating fuel for the the novel actention at the same time as this actention when paid and focused kept the CURSES extra synaptically sequestered (unconscious).

 

Perhaps it is not too inÆPT to propose that the first to us ancestral simian carrier of an ambiadvantageous mutation was not born with an ability to verbalise anything but born with a cognitive capacity that led it to make the first fire? 

 

A typical ambiadvantageous (typically also pleiotropic) mutation in our recent phylogeny (not from about the time just after our lineage split from that of our chimpanzee cousins but from about 100-200K years ago or before the time the last successful exodus of moderns humans from Africa) was a rudimentary language-endowing mutations that not only conferred an enhanced capacity to block but to adaptively reroute action potentials generated from the excitatory core of CURSES [-type implicit memories]; that is, such signals would then for the first time been rerouted to co-motivate an Opportunity-taking language-function-assisted behavior (or a ditto actention).

 

EAVASIVE actentions typically supplement the synaptic gating of toward a distress-type response destined signals generated at the core of CURSES. EAVASIVE behaviors do so (typically) by recruiting the in all brainy animals existing general functional principle of centre/surround excitation/inhibition or more precisely and ÆPTly put: the principle of inhibitory competition between simultaneously sensory stimulated different incompatible actention modules. 

​

The synaptic relay blocking brain function that is ÆPTly referred to with the suitably instructive word "hibernation" (in the abbreviation "SH") protects against maladaptively distress-motivating sensory messages. That is, "maladaptively distress-motivating" sensory messages as in: inflammation-/pain-/fear-motivating AND unfortunately, but naturally, also sometimes compassion-motivating sensory messages because of the legacy of naturally selective situations where a wilting away of a fiendishly fanatic ruthlessness would preclude a successful attempt to exploit (take) the evolutionary/selective/lifetime Opportunity to kill for food, or do so by userping neighboring 'fellow hominines/humans' (for the adaptive gain of possessing their territorial, gathered, cultural, or 'human' i.e. bride-stealable or enslavable, resources. 

​

Hence, SH refers primarily to the possibility of a highly specific synapse blocking ("gating")  inhibitory function that also results in a relatively metabolism-muting postsynaptic effect. This "synapse blocking" function is one that prevents maladaptive actention becoming paid (in the currency of neurometabolic resources) to both circumstantial threats of "SH imploring type" and to by past SHI type perils (and ditto predicaments or ordeals) automatically caused to become incurred 'imprints of CURSES type'. 

​

It is important (and of course ÆPT) to understand that this most passive and specific possible defensive brain functional aspect, namely SH, allows or can simultaneously assist exploitative pursuits that has a good chance of resulting in a procreation promoting (opportunity-taking) outcome. It is important because the meaning of the concEPT of ambiadvatageous mutations" 

​

'Brain building and behavioral repertoire extending' mutations (not only but most of all pleiotropic such) that as a matter of a sub principle of Natural Selection (a sub principle/sub heuristic that is only approximately and tentatively named by the whole and by a portion of what the concEPT of EAVASIVE stands for) did typically not just make possible new or more versatile behaviors of preoccupations or "focuses of actention" that lead to successful sequestration of sensory stimulation caused by 1. for any reason ended up under circumstantial threats of SH imploring type and 2. CURSES ('implicit memories of CURSES type')! 

That is, such mutations (or mutations that match the this sub principle of especially the phylogeny of us folk) have not just passed the tests provided by lifetime challenges/evolutionary pressures of "SHI type come CURSES type" but they were as if naturally tested by with SHI threat and/or CURSES situationally overlapping environmentally present lifetime challenges/evolutionary pressures of opportunity type. That is, such ambiadvantageously adaptive were by natural selection found to favor the survival of the individual phenotypes that pioneered them.

The kinds of Opportunity type challenges/pressures involved (actually taken and thus actually procreation promoting such) included environmentally present and exploitable opportunities such as e.g. potential mating partners, the opportunity to usurp the territory of neighboring hominids, and much more.

 

 

 

 

 

It is ÆPT to speculate (based on what is known about the functional significance of Neanderthal genes that remain mainly in non-African people alive today) that some ambiadvantageous mutations that occurred in the modern human lineage but not in the lineage of the Neanderthals and Denisovans conferred extra ‘EAVASIVE (psychobehavioral) traits for resisting’ depression (or prevent listlessness) caused by an accumulation of CURSES [i.e. implicit memories conditioned-in or 'put' by circumstantial threats of SHI type].

​

It is ÆPT to contend that our "modern humans" and their likewise ambiadvantageous mutation carrying and expressing fellow sept (extended family group) members were, compared to their contemporary archaic humans, more inclined and capable of staunchly (more fanatically) carry out opportunity exploiting collective endeavors such as raiding usurping but sometimes also bride-steal from Neanderthals and Denisovans.

 

But of course each additional momentously ambiadvantageous mutation in the lineage of modern humans would first have resulted in a selective sweep within its family group of origin; quite like many of these mutations would have occurred before the last successful emmigration from Africa  by "moderns".

​

The main cause of the demise of the “archaics” is highly likely to have involved them having lacked such an extra adaptive edge — one provided by an Evolved Ambiadvantageous[ly adaptive] Verbal (language function assisted) Actention (selection serving) System Involving (amongst much else but here highly instructive and helpful to be able to include) Various Endo{genous}opiates; Or, by abbreviation: The archaics" were not as EAVASIVE as were our main "modern human" ancestors.  

​

The discovered admixture of archaic (specifically Neanderthal and Denisovan) DNA in current non-African people suggests not only that "modern" females met up and mated with "archaic" males (possibly in relatively peaceful circumstances) our main male common ancestor’s of today's non-Africans surely also bride-steal from "the archaics". 

​

While it is conceivable, and a much more cozy and comforting thought, that romantic mixing of these lineages of humans also did occur the other possibility of how some of our main common ancestors added adaptive-enough sequences of archaic DNA to the genepol of many of todays (mainly non-Africans) cannot be cogently refuted. 
 

To not accept the above as an approximate description of an 'anthropic evolutionary psychology type' truth will be impossible for anyone who is suitably science-factually informed and percEPTive while not too infected by the virus of political correctness virtue signaling.

​

IOW: Anyone who disagrees is by ÆPT definition inEPT.😎