About our recent phylogeny and the contribution by "modern" humans (the main or only human ancestors of all humans alive today) to why the lineages of "archaic" humans stopped lengthening
It is ÆPT to draw the conclusion that mainly our male "modern human" ancestors strongly contributed to the demise of archaic humans [definitely the Neanderthals and Denisovans but possibly also another now likewise extinct subspeicies of archaic humans]. And that they did so by raiding and usurping them.
It is also ÆPT to conclude that bride-stealing was not uncommonly associated with raids by modern humans on archaic humans because archaeogeneticists have proven that some Neanderthals and Denisovans often enough had sex with modern humans as evidenced by the admixture of Neanderthal DNA and/or Denisovan DNA found in non-African people alive today. It is a given (is by both current historical and prehistorical evidence) that males from a small extended family group of "modern humans" did raid groups of no less intelligent or sophisticated "archaic humans" who nevertheless were likely to fall victim for reasons of psychobiological (basically genetic) differences.
The differential is one that is almost never considered (or is very rarely emphasised).
This difference would have meant that the so called "archaics" were less inclined and less capable (than were our "modern human" main ancestors) of becoming aroused into, and to staunchly maintain, a focus of murderously aggressive intertribal actention.
It is also ÆPT to contend that a probably pleiotropic gene that mainly non-Africans have inherited from Neanderthals and that has been found to correlate with depression (as in a state of listlessness and sadness) but less or not (AFAIK) with mania. Another admixtured 'archaic gene' has been associated (by researchers) with some (presumably mainly non-African) people's obvious tendency to become addicted to nicotine — a correlation that may be imply a relevance that is far wider than the estimated link to tobacco.
Apropos which, it is far from implausible that our no longer around archaic human cousins chewed some leafs or plants that gave them 'nicotinergic' (or by some closely related other psychoactive substance provided) soothing/depression alleviating relief.
Another support for the (almost certainly true) ÆPT hypothesis that "moderns" did not just haste the demise of archaics but while doing so caused the admixture of their genes into our lineage by bride-stealing from them is that the admixture of archaic genes is not found in the Y-chromosome. The reason for why archaic DNA is missing in the Y-chromosome of non-Africans is not completely known but there are hints that male archaics could not produce viable hybrid offspring with "moderns".
Momentous mutations [i.e. selective sweep starting mutations] are have almost certainly been involved in how evolution (by neo-Darwinian natural selection) made us into the kind of fauna that we are.
And these momentous (more than other adaptive trait causing) mutations played out their role at first in context of their family groups of origin. More about how this could and most likely did happen, later.
We are a species of animals that exist in sub-populations that to different degrees are capable of manifesting various examples of visual and auditory Arts and products Science (and technology).
Aside from this difference, all humans are, if given certain environmental (including social) preconditions and current circumstances, inclined to behave caringly and cooperatively.
However, it is ÆPT to recognize that it is apt to also characterize us as follows:
1. We are fiendish — e.g. we are clearly inclined to become triggered to behave viciously based on our tribal insitnct;
2. We are foolish — i.e. even the most intelligent of us can be foolish (e.g the brain of generally intelligent people more often than not stop them from becoming devotees to the ÆPT dogma and from swallowing and digesting also other concEPTs. Aside from which, we are all extremely capable of and inclined to deceive ourselves and others by means of our verbal or otherwise symbolizing (language-related) cognitive functions.
[The sole proprietor of ÆIMC Internetional Ptd. Lty. is not one of the most intelligent of us, but he is not inEPT as far as how he appreciation of all concEPTs.😏
Besides, and as if to make matters worse, people in general have evolved to deny themselves the pleasure of donating to ÆIMC Internetional — hence "ÆPT ideas marketed conspicuously" on the Internet have almost no chance of becoming memes that amends human affairs and helps us to aim our societies toward becoming optimally regulated meritocratic market economies whose "optimal (socioeconomic) regulation"would have to be guided NOT by the principle "Do to others what you want done to yourself" but by the science-aligned instructive meaning of the thoroughly defined, subjectivity snubbing and seriously meant (although on its surface mirth-inviting) ÆPT 'dogma' (or ditto motto/catch phrase) *"ALQ-holism is the best ism!"* (or, conversely, "ALQ-holists are the best ists!").
How some 'human-making' mutations resulted in selective sweeps depended on where they first played out:
At first, a selective sweep does of course take place within the extended family groups (local populations) wherein such a "momentous" mutations occurred.
Female individuals that pioneered (were the first to express) a pleiotropic mutation that resulted in an extra EAVASIVE phenotype (ditto characteristics) would typically have been more capable of attracting and choosing mating partners (and have more offspring) than their sexual rivals.
Male pioneers of such momentous (and likewise typically pleiotropic) EAVASIVE mutations would have played an even more significant role in these selective sweeps; Did so because of the much higher number of off-spring they were able to produce by procreating with more than one of the females in their extended family group.
Male mutants would have been able to do so by outsmarting, out-doing and out-impressing their sexual rivals — e.g. by manifesting pioneering talents that most importantly also impressed and attracted fecund females. (Female pioneers of extra EAVASIVEness would of course have done so to their female rivals.)
For example, our EAVASIVEness-pioneering common ancestors would have had extra useful and impressive tool-making skills, plausibly (but of course not necessarily) 'pleiotropically paired' with a superior capacity and extra propensity to impress by making attempts to communicate verbally (even if at first no one could respond in kind). Some of these "pioneers of our EAVASIVE traits (or trait complexes)" would surely also have impressed in rudimentary ways of skills and talents that we now associate with all of "The (auditory and visual) Arts" — e.g. drumming/humming/singing, dancing, and sculpting/carving and painting.
The fate of less EAVASIVE ('less modern') family groups of hominine individuls who happened to be neighbors to a by a momentous EAVASIVE mutation as if souped up 'sept' [here = extended family group of which our main hominine and human ancestors were members tended to be sealed, and quite rather regularly so the momentous 'extra EAVASIVEness enabling' mutation had become carried by all adult of the sept in which such mutations occurred.
In our relatively recent phylogeny mutations that conferred and 'EAVASIVE edge' become fixed or resulted in an intra-tribal selective sweep by involving all possible ways that mating rivals could have competed with each other. After such selective sweeps within septs had been completed did such momentous mutations have extended repercussions by way of successive almost domino-effect-like' usurpings of distinctly less 'EAVASIVEly endowed' septs of nonetheless often closely related septs or simians/hominines/humans.
Even though Neanderthals and Denisovans may conceivable have been more intelligent than our with them contemporary main ancestors were, they nonetheless would have been unable to withstand our male ancestors' and their likewise EAVASIVEly enhanced 'brothers in arms' because our mail ancestors and their cohorts possessed an extra EAVASIVEness that provided them with a superior capacity to maintain a fanatically focused, fearless, merciless and more methodically murderous attitude toward their less modern/less EAVASIVEly endowed hominine/human neighbors.
In humankind's African cradle (both beneficially and brusquely rocked by an indifferent "Mother Nature") every additional momentous EAVASIVE mutation would have tended to spread to eventually lead to that "modern humans" make up its entire human population.
Approximately since the ancestral pair that we have in common with today's chimpanzees, our phylogeny has involved 'pleitropic' mutations (some but not all of which have been EAVSIVEness-conferring but have at least resulted in selection pressures that tended to select for EAVASIVE traits given that ditto mutations occurred) that have manifested as, for example:
1. An increasingly upright and well-balanced bipedalism 'paid for' by a concomitantly narrowed pelvis that made getting out from the womb into a guaranteed to be more or less traumatizing (SH imploring and because of pre-evolved neural functions SH-inducing) and CURSES incurring gauntlet.
Some of these momentous mutations may well have been pleiotropic in such a way that they caused babies to be born both extra early with bigger brains/craniums. However, long previously evolved endoopiate-releasing neural mechanisms and other relevant neural or neurohormonal functions came to the rescue —
neural functions that serve to prevent maladaptive distress by means of a release of endogenous opioids have existed since very early on in the evolution of animals.
These pain/distress blocking functions came to the rescue both in respect of having a distress blocking effect on babies being born (through a by a pelvic bones made almost too narrow birth canal) and a distress dampening and delivery facilitating effect on females giving birth.
2. A commensurately cut short gestation period which caused a prolonged postnatal period of precarious self-helplessness (neoteny) that increased the likelihood that the immature offspring ended up under further SH imploring threats (e.g. predicaments or ordeals in which their psychosocial needs got seriously neglected) — hence corresponding CURSES were left behind for in and for our ancestors' brains to be coped with (as it turned out successfully so).
[A CURSES is an automatically conditioned-in aftermath (or implicit memory) of a SHI threat; And all genuine CURSES (now plural) constitute an extra selection pressure that has prioritized the preservation of ambiadvantageous[ly adaptive] mutations.]
3. A budding ability to with articulated sounds and with gestures (initially as something as simple as pointing with the index finger) communicate and coordinate goals and experienced/perceived threats and opportunities.
Through further "modernizing" mutations today's variety of "EAVASIVE humans" arouse.
Some reiterations of what it is ÆPT to recognize and consider:
As far it has been (and always will be) naturally possible, a mutation that confer both an extra capacity to cope by a passive inhibitory response and by an extra potent type of active defensive or opportunity exploiting ('positively procreation promoting') behavior, has as a matter of principle been prioritized in the phylogeny of fauna.
The internal neurological pressures generated (in the form of excitatory messages) from the core of CURSES 'must' of course also be adaptively coped with in order for individuals who have incurred such primarily insidious (conditioned in) states (implicit memories of a 'CURSESing kind') to contribute to a lengthening of their lineage.
With support from the recent finding that a side-effect from us having carrying "archaic DNA" predisposes many of us to become depressed and to become addicted to/sooth ourselves with nicotine containing tobacco.
It is ÆPT to hold the view that increased EAVASIVEness that the uniquely 'modern human making' momentous mutations (genetic recipe changes) in our phylogeny would have manifested as a boosted capacity to be extra psychologically tough and ruthless raiders.
Such mutations typically made those who carried them less prone to listlessness (or depression) and to have an extra capacity for staunch idealism, self-deception, and for inadvertently as well deliberately deceiving others.
Within the extended family group wherein the EAVASIVEness enhancing genetic tweaks occurred what ensued was in every case an initial "selective sweep" mainly via sexual selection i.e. mainly how our common ancestors became winners of the mating game.
Subsequent to such "fixing" of these mutations, a wider selective sweep would have occurred similar to a "domino effect". It would have done so in that usurping raids (not without the involvement of bride stealing) met with success (at the expense of our ancestors' "less modern" (lacking the latest ambiadvantageous mutations) neighbors.
Many current humans carry some Neanderthal genes (that amongst else predispose to depression) and/or Denisovan genes because bride-stealing obviously occurred in conjunction with many a murderous raid and usurpings of these quite possibly equally intelligent (or perhaps in some ways more intelligent) "archaic" humans.
While it is of course nicer to imagine that romantic sexual encounters took place, the obvious elephant in the room is that modern humans edged out archaic humans via aggressive inter-tribal competition (and when in came to organizing and staunchly/fanatically engaging in murderous (genocidal) acts of tribal aggression.
It remains to be figured out, but there just might have existed a possible genetic barrier against — or one that provided less of a chance for — a male archaic human (a Neanderthal or Denisovan) to reproduced with a "modern human" than it did for a "modern male" to back then reproduce with an archaic female.
If it was so the bride-stealing might have played a 'really big' role in how the admixture of archaic DNA got into the genomes of mainly non-African people alive today.
Of greatest relevance, to how we humans function and behave individually, in groups, and on a very large coordinated scale, is an aspect of our recent phylogeny that ironically has been the least well accounted for by anthropologic evolutionary psychology type biologists/scientists/professors/academics/philosophers.
I'm referring to the complementary ÆPT perspective on how we evolved to be the most empowered and elaborately EAVASIVE of all species within Earth's biosphere.
[EAVASIVE is the most integrative of all concEPTs contrived to be expressible as acronyms.
It could not have been contrived without a resolutely applied Tolerance-principled/most pragmatic attitude combined with sem_antics as well as seriously science-aligned semantics.]
EAVASIVE is an ÆPTly allusive approximate acronymic representation of words to the effect of:
The most exceptionally empowered and most highly Evolved, Ambiadvantageous[ly adapted] Verbal Actention [Selection Serving] System [of all anthropic apes who ever lived] Including Various Endoopiates [how I expediently refer to neuropeptides such as endorphin, enkephalin and dynorphin — i.e. neurochemicals with a widely known/published function that is instructive of the meaning of EAVASIVE while luckily also lending an acronym-ending E.
Our recent phylogeny Involved the foul fact that our EAVASIVEness pioneering and many of our merely lineage lengthening ancestors successfully took the by their environment presented (to them) opportunity to raid rape and usurp the resources under the control of neighboring family groups. The fact that our (mainly male) ancestors took these opportunities successfully depended on the ambiadvantageously adaptive genetic mutations that they carried and expressed while the members of the family groups they usurped were not 'as EAVASIVEly endowed'.
However, before one of the momentous (selective sweep causing) ambiadvantageous mutations played out in ways that naturally pruned out less EAVASIVEly evolved pockets (tribes or septs or local populations) of people, the same mutations initially paid off via sexual selection within the family group which where these mutations originated and were carried and expressed by our common modern (or on the way to become modern) human ancestors.
These (EAVASIVEness increasing) mutations conferred new or increased capabilities by which to out-compete sexual rivals and attracting mating partners within their extended family group or origin (and of course also played out this way in their circle of siblings).
This "ambiadvantageousness prioritizing" aspects of how we evolved is most commonly lacking in the accounts of the phylogeny of the fauna capable of calling themselves “folk”.
Imagine a female or male human ancestor that was EAVASIVEly enhanced in one or more ways such that it manifested in a relatively outstanding tool-making capability and a notable hunting prowess; or as an admirable and desirable food finding, gathering and processing capability; or in an "appealing and/or warrior-motivating dancing", or in enchanting singing, rythmical/hypnotic (distress defeating work and warfare assisting drumming), and admirable painting or drawing skills, or both fascinating and fanatic belief-instilling story-making/telling..... etcetera.
Only our instinctive social correctness and a self-censoring aversion to self-shaming is what prevents all paleoanthropically oriented scientists to draw the clearly justified conclusion that our forefathers (to a greater extent than our foremothers) made a significant and violent contribution to the causes behind the fact that there are no longer populations of so called "archaic humans" (such as the Neanderthals and Denisovans) living in parallel with us currently alive (and so called "modern") humans.
The past populations of Neanderthals and Denisovans shared (with modern humans) genetic recipe changes that brought about a well balanced and habitual bipedal lifestyles and for being born through a narrowed pelvis that made a traumatic (SHI-type) birth a normal introduction to life outside the womb; and they too had a capacity for verbal communication and typically human cognitive capabilities.
However, it is ÆPT to recognize and emphasize that a relatively tiny phylogenetic divergences (debuted by ambiadvantageous mutations and those ancestors of ours who pioneered the enhanced EAVASIVE traits that these mutations conferred) became a very "telling" (i.e. archaic population terminating) difference!
The "modern personality" arouse and manifested as an extra psychological toughness (personalities less prone to listlessness and depression); as an extra capacity to be fanatically directed by self-made or secondhand ideas/beliefs — i.e. certain mutations made back then already existent language-functions extra capable of impacting on pain perception and cognitive awareness or, more generally and ÆPTly put, such mutations typically caused preexisting language-functions to play an even more potent role in the operation of modern humans' ASSS.
The power of hypnotic suggestions demonstrates the depth of the psychophysiological effects of our languages.
Entertaining stage performances by hypnotists (aside from clinical and research oriented uses of hypnosis) also suggest how, in hominine evolution, naturally selective lifetime challenges happened (initially within family groups and extended family groups and large tribes) via language-function related uniquely anthropic mate attracting and mating rival outmaneuvering ambiadvantageous[ly adaptive] abilities — not excluding mating rival murdering/and genocidal maneuvering!
What mutations for extra EAVASIVEness (~ambiadvantageously adaptive language-function linked creative anxiety-combating and distress-deflecting cognitive and capabilities) most specifically are ÆPTly held to have conferred is anything from a procreation promoting increased capacity to cooperate constructively or aggressively (and as a result also do so on an extra large scale, as emphasized by Yuval Harari) and do so more reliably and cohesively by means of a ideas/beliefs and by some mating partner attracting and mating rival our-doing new or extra impressive artistic or practical skills that while they were insidiously co-motivated by CURSES also provided (the same as similar ideas and beliefs and similarly useful talents do in today's humans) inhibitory input that reinforced the by "specific/synaptic hibernation" maintained disconnections within by a CURSES beset actention modules for SHI-threat specific distress type state of consciousnessT.
Since what is being explained is how we evolved and how we have hung on as a species at least until now, it does not whether the idealism referred to has been is rational or reflects physical reality and self-deception as well deception of others within the extended family group where the corresponding genetic tweaks arouse and caused a most initially caused a selective sweep. The selective sweep became larger similar to a domino-effect by more efficient successful attempts to raid neighboring humans that lacked the crucial mutations (possibly only one such, for a domino effect to occur).
Many current humans carry some Neanderthal genes (that amongst else predispose to depression) and/or Denisovan genes because bride-stealing obviously occurred in conjunction with many a murderously usurping raid of archaics.
While it is of course nicer to imagine that romantic sexual encounters took place the obvious elephant in the room is that modern humans had the edge when in came to engaging in (organizing and staunchly/fanatically carry out) murderous intraspecies interactivity. [There may even have existed a possible genetic barrier against a male archaic human (Neanderthal) being able to successfully reproduce with a modern human.]