NeuroQuantology | September 2009 | Vol 7 | Issue 3 | Page 482-490 482 Saniotis A, Evolving brain and neuroanthrophology OPINION AND PERSPECTIVES— Evolving Brain Neuroanthropology, Emergence, and Cognitive Frontiers Arthur Saniotis Abstract Emergence is an interesting concept for explaining human evolution. An understanding of emergence enables us to define the role of novelty and creativity in human beings and their complex behavioural repertoire. Emergence merits a neuroscientific approach since the brain is a process of biological evolution, therefore, signifying the biological basis of human consciousness and experience. In this paper I outline three areas of emergence and the human brain which may further assist us in understanding the relationship between brain and culture. Key Words: Neuroanthropology, emergence, and cognitive frontiers NeuroQuantology 2009; 3: 482-490 Introduction1 certain features can be described as emergent This paper will examine the concept of due to the “increase in complexity from the emergence in relation to the human brain. The physical components out of which it emerged” notion of emergence has been extensively (Huyssteen 2006: 653). Clayton further notes: examined in terms of cosmic and biological “When in addition internal changes in biological evolution. Alternately, there have been entities themselves become productive of comparatively few studies on emergence and complex behaviors, and in particular when they human evolution. The central thesis of enhance the organism’s prospects for survival emergence is that biological systems increase in and reproduction, we speak of them as their level of self organization and complexity. purposive behaviors” (2004: 97). As organisms This is in a nut shell. In nature emergence is increase in their complexity they manifest a depicted in complex and multitudinous range of qualitatively complex and flexible biological forms “of self-generating networks” behaviours which ultimately defines them as (Capra 2002:13). Evolution is adumbrated by being markedly different (Clayton 2004:99). In novel forms and adaptation strategies which other words, greater “complexity and flexibility” increase the complexity of living organisms. For may posit the conditions for emergence in a Maturana and Varela (1987), life forms exhibit specific species (Huyssteen 2006:653). autopoeisis, based on self organising principles. In human beings, the emergence of Emergence implies that in biological evolution brain/mind must be examined through its evolutionary history from which brain has evolved. Understanding the relationship Corresponding author: Arthur Saniotis between brain/mind and between Address: Discipline of Anthropology, School of Social Sciences. The University of Adelaide “consciousness and its neural correlates”— Phone: + +61 8 8303 5730 demands an understanding of the multilevel Fax: +61 8 8303 5733 e-mail: [email protected] structure of nature (Huyssteen 2006:654). This ISSN 1303 5150 www.neuroquantology.com NeuroQuantology | September 2009 | Vol 7 | Issue 3 | Page 482-490 483 Saniotis A, Evolving brain and neuroanthrophology is in itself is a demanding task, one in which evolution of brain encephalisation and neuroscience in conjunction with biological and complexity was probably prompted by the behavioral sciences is exploring. According to increasing social complexities of early hominid Grof (1990:11), the neurophysical activities of life. Sociality was an essential factor in neural the brain and its creative intelligence manifest development and informed social behaviour in the ingenious principles of nature. On this such a way that it fostered the advent of culture. theme, the cybernetician Gregory Bateson For the Russian neurophysiologist A. R. Luria, expresses that the properties of mind are human consciousness was also contoured by a expressed throughout nature (1971). Bateson “rich net of essential relations” (Luria 1987). sums this up in the following: “If you want to According to one popular theory understand mental process, look at biological encapsulated by Diamond’s phrase “The Great evolution and conversely if you want to Leap Forward”, there was an explosion in art, understand biological evolution, go look at ritual, technology and social organization around mental process”(Manghi 2002, xi). If, then, the 40,000 years ago (Diamond 1991). Numerous emergence of human consciousness is visible in artifacts of this period support this cultural evolution, how much more will it be evident in efflorescence. In comparison, Neanderthal tools cultural evolution which is undoubtedly the show little innovation from 100,000-40,000 hallmark of Homo sapiens (Huyssteen 2006: years ago (Diamond 1991:37). Diamond’s thesis 655). Culture as a product of the brain’s is interesting since it is apparently supported neuroplasticity is embedded in novelty and with modern scientific findings which show that utmost flexibility due to its reliance on symbolic two genes regulate brain growth – language. Unlike biological evolution, cultural microcephalin and ASPM (abnormal spindle-like evolution is rapid and incredibly novel. The microcephaly associated). According to Nitzan efflorescence of culture has accelerated the et al (2005), the microcephaly allele in humans brain’s intelligence and ability to assess arose around 37,000 years ago, about the time incredible amounts of information in a relatively of the hypothesized Great Leap Forward. The short amount of time. Moreover, cultural ASPM allele emerged around 5,800 years ago at transmission has been able to “codirect genetic the advent of the Second Great Leap Forward evolution” (Laland et al 2000:132; Boyd & which saw the emergence of cities, complex Richerson 1985). social hierarchies, writing, improved This essay will locate the evolving brain technologies and sophisticated aesthetic and emergence in three areas: Brain evolution. awareness – the hallmarks of civilization. In Secondly, I provide a neurophysiological addition, the recent ASPM selected variant overview of ritual. The area of ritual and brain suggests that the Homo sapien brain is still provides a fruitful area for understanding the evolving, an aspect which I will discuss later on. emergence of novelty and its neural substrate. Intelligence and novelty was an ongoing In the third section, I proffer new possible process in the hominid line over millions of years evolutionary directions of the brain due to the and is not the sole property of Homo sapiens. advent of nano-bio-information technologies. For instance, the cranial impressions of the brain of Homo habilis (circa 2.2 mya) shows indications Evolving Emergence of developed Broca’s and Wernicke’s areas Numerous studies reveal that the Homo sapien which may have given this early hominid the brain has increased three times its size since the ability for rudimentary speech (Bradshaw Pliocene period. Over the last five million years 1997:38). Since there is little genetic variation increases in the hominid brain have been between apes and humans, the growth of paralleled by an increase in body size cortical areas was likely to have been influenced (Henneberg 1998:745). For example, the three by “regulatory genes” over time (Bradshaw fold increase in brain size over the past four 1997:38). Furthermore, encephalisation of early million years has been from the hominid ancestors (Homo rudolfensis, Homo Australopithecines (450 ml) to modern Homo habilis, Homo ergaster, and Homo erectus) was sapiens (1350 ml) (Henneberg 1998:746). The coupled with cerebral reorganization and brain ISSN 1303 5150 www.neuroquantology.com NeuroQuantology | September 2009 | Vol 7 | Issue 3 | Page 482-490 484 Saniotis A, Evolving brain and neuroanthrophology lateralisation (Arsuaga & Martinez 2006:126- ‘deep structure.’ According to Levi-Strauss, the 127). Increases in the neo-cortex was probably human brain orders the world into oppositional prompted by the developments in social categories i.e. male/female, hot/cold/up/.down, organization and the concomitant development right/left, raw/cooked. These oppositional of ‘social intelligence’ (Arsuaga & Martinez categories reflect the binary structure of the 2006:127). The hypothesis that social brain (Levi-Strauss 1963, 1966). On this point, organisation was a driving force in early hominid both authors mention that their structural encephalisation may have been advantageous in model privileges the neuroplasticity of the brain predicting changing social patterns and and its massive neural matrix (Lipp 2000). pressures which ensued novel social adaptations Moreover, the brain is not limitless in its (Bradshaw 1997:163; Humphrey 1976). The fact neuroplasticity but is regulated and constrained that primate and Homo social organisation by a genetic precursor. The genetically exhibits high complexity gives credence to this predisposed neural model organises experience argument (Ehrlich 2000:113). As early hominid in particular ways – a process called social organisation increased on several levels neurogenesis (Laughlin et al 1979:8; Guthrie within the group and between other groups, this 2000). Laughlin and d’Aquilli insist that human led to a positive feedback system which allowed behaviour is characterised by the interplay individuals to become adept to the requirements between “the central nervous system and the of the changing social environment. These new environment” (1974:195). While this idea is not environmental pressures fostered an array of new it does confirm the role of