Analysis of Reasoning Process for Scientific Explanation on the Evolution of Early Human Beings

Author(s):  
Jin-Young Park ◽  
Yong-Ju Kwon
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naimeng Zhang ◽  
Qinghai Xu ◽  
Dongju Zhang ◽  
Ulrike Herzschuh ◽  
Zhongwei Shen ◽  
...  

<p>Understanding the paleoenvironment (such as climate and landscape) in the area where the early ancient human appears on the Tibetan Plateau is an interesting topic. Based on the results of pollen data on the Yaowuyao loess section of the Qinghai Lake Basin, we used landscape reconstruction algorithms to reconstruct the changes in vegetation cover for 15,000 years. It is shown that the vegetation in the Yaowuyao area changed from temperate steppe (15-7.5 ka) to forest-steppe (7.5-4 ka). Compared with previous studies on the sediment in Qinghai Lake, our study can better reflect the local environment of the Qinghai Lake basin. Furthermore, based on the paleoclimate change data and archeological data from the surrounding areas, it is noticed that while precipitation increases and trees increase, human activities decrease. This may be caused by the substance and strategies of the ancient human beings that have adapted to the steppe. In addition, our results also show that the intensity of ancient human activity has a negative correlation with plant biodiversity, which may be related to human disturbance to the environment. Our paleoecological and environmental study not only shows the paleoenvironment of the early human activities on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau but also revealed possible early human activity signals.</p>


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Troy Arnel Crayton, Ph.D.

<p>The fallacy of race as a product of the categorization of the cognitive systems of human beings is well documented (Feagin & Ducey, 2019; Higginbotham, 2013; Hirschfeld, 1938; Miles & Brown, 2003). Recently, the calls to dismantle racism is reaching crescendo catalyzed by the movement ignited by the murder of George Floyd. In fact, a Google search of “dismantling racism” produces 13,600,000 results (June 7, 2020). But what are the criteria, or system of ideas, to determine if racism is, or is not, ‘dismantled’? Are we aware and in agreement as to “what” racism is individually, let alone collectively? And when we know, will we then know “how” to dismantle it individually and collectively?</p> <p>Toward establishing and developing a mechanism for addressing questions of this nature, the semeiotic theory of Charles Sanders Peirce (<a>Houser & Kloesel, 1992; Houser & colleaugues, 1998</a>) and an explanation for the thinking process argued by John Dewey (1991), this developing hypothesis for this work is to provide guidance for answering these questions by first establishing a method aimed at discovering the reasoning criteria that determine meaning of ‘racism’ for each of us. These logicians, and others including Burke and Stets (2009) and Ryan and Deci (2017), for example, make it clear that the reasoning process, including how one perceives, interprets, and reasons, sheds some light on the influencing criteria of these phenomena. So, what happens cognitively as a person makes meaning of entities, phenomenon, and events through the reasoning process including subprocesses of perceiving and interpreting associations to race. </p>


Author(s):  
Saroj Kothari ◽  
Deepak Jahagirdar

The effects of colour on life have been of great significance to early human beings, whose very existence was governed by light and darkness. Most living things appear to be vitalized by the bright reds, oranges, and yellows of daylight and calmed and rejuvenated by the blues, indigos, and violets of the night (Graham, 1998). The story of colour is almost the story of civilization itself. Man’s love of colour is as old as his time on earth, and it is apparent in his early pottery and art. “Colour acts upon the human body; it is the key touched by man to obtain the appropriate vibration from his creative spirit” (Kandinsky 1914). All nature was coloured and ancient man tried to emulate it, copy it, and symbolize it.


Author(s):  
Gisela Giner Rommel

La llamada era o siglo de la biotecnología, y con ella, una nueva realidad genética artificial, va abriéndose camino inexorablemente. La misma supone nuevas formas de dominio de la vida natural y humana sin precedentes. El hombre puede ya alterar nada menos que el curso de la evolución de las especies. Es fácil adivinar entonces por qué la genética traspasa su propio ámbito científico: se encuentra ineludiblemente cargada de dilemas éticos de toda índole, y unida al mundo filosófico y moral por su urgente necesidad de respuestas. La primera gran reflexión que la genética plantea a la ética es de tal calibre, que zozobra los cimientos de la propia tradición filosófica occidental y su concepción de la dignidad humana. Si el hallazgo del genoma humano lleva consigo una propensión de la visión de la realidad humana exclusivamente cientificista y biológica, procediendo a realizar una verdadera «sacralización de la ciencia» ¿Supone ello el derrumbe, la invalidación de la condición ética y libre del hombre? ¿Debemos renunciar a una visión del mismo como un ser digno y reducirlo a un animal más? ¿Debemos, en definitiva, dar carpetazo al humanismo, poniendo en tela de juicio la calidad moral del hombre? ¿Cerrar entonces los espacios de la ética o la filosofía, declarando que todos los aspectos que encierran la condición humana se consumen en una explicación científica? ¿Cómo afrontar otros posibles ataques a dimensiones de la dignidad humana como la libertad, la igualdad, la intimidad? ¿Precisan de disciplinas distintas, como la filosofía y el derecho, en busca de soluciones que exceden del campo científico y a los que éste no puede dar respuestas? Ante los nuevos poderes y responsabilidades que trae consigo el progreso científico, la explicación ética y la científica no deben sino reencontrarse. Apostar por el control ético del rumbo del proceso científico y tecnológico a través del paradigma de la dignidad humana se torna imprescindible. En definitiva, tratar de llevar a cabo el sueño del progreso universal, real, en el que la genética constituya un eslabón, un peldaño más en su consecución efectiva no puede darse sin intervención de la reflexión ética.This is definitely the age of biotechnology and with it comes a new artificial genetic reality. Biotechnology gives us never seen before control over plant, animal and human life. Mankind may now even be able to change the course of evolution in all living creatures, no less. That is why it is easy to understand that the science of genetics transcends its own domain; it is unavoidably confronted with ethical dilemmas of all kind and it is compelled to turn to philosophy and morality because of its need to find answers urgently. The first question raised by genetics is of such a magnitude that it overturns the basis of the Western philosophical tradition and its concept of human dignity. If the decoding of the human genome leads to an exclusively scientific and biological vision of human reality, to what you could call a «sacralisation of science», then what happens to free will, to man as an ethical being? Should we henceforth refuse to consider Man as a creature of Dignity and reduce him to just another animal? Should we, in short, abandon all humanistic idealism and question even the morality of human beings? Should we forget about ethics and philosophy and agree that all the aspects, implicit in the human condition, can find a scientific explanation? But how then should we deal with other attacks that may be made against such dimensions of human dignity as liberty, equality and privacy? Will there be no need for other disciplines, such as philosophy and law, to find solutions to problems which exceed the field of science and for which science has no answers to give?. In the face of all the new powers, potential and responsibilities brought about by scientific progress, ethics and science should not become adversaries. Ethical control over the course of scientific and technological progress based on the paradigm of human dignity is becoming essential. To summarise, it will be impossible to realise the dream of true progress, in which the science of genetics is but one step, without answering ethical questions.


TECHNOLOGOS ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 34-44
Author(s):  
Prokofyev Andrey

The paper deals with borders between different tasks of the ethical theory such as defining, explaining, justifying morality, and clarifying its normative content. The focus of the study is justification of morality, i.e. developing the argumentation that can persuade a rational agent to accept moral requirements and to carry them out. The justification of morality uses as its premise some universal human needs or traits and establishesthe essential tie between them and theprincipled fulfillment of moral duty. The fact that everyone has these needs or traits should convince a rational moral skeptic to abandon her skepticism. The immediate subjects of the analysis are 1) precedents of the unreflecting confusion of justification and three other tasks of ethics and 2) conscious efforts to make the scientific explanation of morality a basis of justification. The author supposes that definitions of morality and its evolutionary, psychological, sociological explanations, no matter how neat and sophisticated they are, can not provide a ‘grip’ on a rational agent. At the same time, clarifications of the general normative content of morality also can not justify it because they presuppose that this ‘grip’ is already in place. In this regard, such conceptions of justification as ‘evolutionary’, ‘psychological’, ‘sociological’, ‘utilitarian’, and even ‘contractual’ are impossible. The author also shows that efforts of some theoreticians to base their justifications on the fact that human beings are constituted to be altruistic by evolution (R. Richards) or carrying out moral norms has an enormous beneficial effect on society (R. Campbell, A.V. Rasin) are not very successful. The real justuficatory work in these cases is done not by the appeal to biological or sociological facts but by traditional arguments – the benefit of an agent or the self-evidence of intuitions


2017 ◽  
Vol 114 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-62
Author(s):  
Shanta Premawardhana

Ever since early human beings were able to seek meaning and purpose in life, religious diversity has existed. Jesus and the early Church needed to navigate this reality as well. Through most of the five hundred year history of the colonial period, Western Christians neglected to address this question with the seriousness it requires, mostly because of a theological attitude of Christian superiority and triumphalism that accompanied the colonial movement. Notable exceptions include the 1893 World’s Parliament of Religions convened in Chicago by a Presbyterian minister and chaired by a Swedenborgian layman, and the 1910 International Mission Conference convened in Edinburgh that gave birth to the modern ecumenical movement. This article will lay out the key theological touch points in the global ecumenical movement’s journey toward interreligious dialogue from 1910 to the present day. It will also offer a proposal for addressing challenges and promises of theological methodology if we were to take seriously the reality of religious diversity.


2020 ◽  
pp. 105971232096215
Author(s):  
Jun Tani ◽  
Jeffrey White

Through brain-inspired modeling studies, cognitive neurorobotics aims to resolve dynamics essential to different emergent phenomena at the level of embodied agency in an object environment shared with human beings. This article is a review of ongoing research focusing on model dynamics associated with human self-consciousness. It introduces the free energy principle and active inference in terms of Bayesian theory and predictive coding, and then discusses how directed inquiry employing analogous models may bring us closer to representing the sense of self in cognitive neurorobots. The first section quickly locates cognitive neurorobotics in the broad field of computational cognitive modeling. The second section introduces principles according to which cognition may be formalized, and reviews cognitive neurorobotics experiments employing such formalizations. The third section interprets the results of these and other experiments in the context of different senses of self, both “minimal” and “narrative” self. The fourth section considers model validity and discusses what we may expect ongoing cognitive neurorobotics studies to contribute to scientific explanation of cognitive phenomena including the senses of minimal and narrative self.


2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-59 ◽  

Abstract In 2014, Guangdong Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology and other institutions excavated Locality 1 of the Modaoshan (Whetting Hill) Site in Yunan County, Guangdong. The excavation recovered almost 400 pieces of lithic products mostly made of quartz, sandstone and quartzite, plus a few made of fine sandstone and metasandstone, the categories of which included blanks, cores, flakes, tools, chunks, debris and utilized gravels, containing the entire procedure from blank fetching, stone tool making and refuse abandoning, and the finished tools took small proportion. The date of Locality 1 was the early stage of the Middle Pleistocene, belonging to the Lower Paleolithic Age. The Modaoshan Site is the first open site of the Paleolithic Age scientifically excavated in Guangdong Province and the earliest cultural remains of the early human beings in Guangdong Province confirmed to date.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Troy Arnel Crayton, Ph.D.

<p>The fallacy of race as a product of the categorization of the cognitive systems of human beings is well documented (Feagin & Ducey, 2019; Higginbotham, 2013; Hirschfeld, 1938; Miles & Brown, 2003). Recently, the calls to dismantle racism is reaching crescendo catalyzed by the movement ignited by the murder of George Floyd. In fact, a Google search of “dismantling racism” produces 13,600,000 results (June 7, 2020). But what are the criteria, or system of ideas, to determine if racism is, or is not, ‘dismantled’? Are we aware and in agreement as to “what” racism is individually, let alone collectively? And when we know, will we then know “how” to dismantle it individually and collectively?</p> <p>Toward establishing and developing a mechanism for addressing questions of this nature, the semeiotic theory of Charles Sanders Peirce (<a>Houser & Kloesel, 1992; Houser & colleaugues, 1998</a>) and an explanation for the thinking process argued by John Dewey (1991), this developing hypothesis for this work is to provide guidance for answering these questions by first establishing a method aimed at discovering the reasoning criteria that determine meaning of ‘racism’ for each of us. These logicians, and others including Burke and Stets (2009) and Ryan and Deci (2017), for example, make it clear that the reasoning process, including how one perceives, interprets, and reasons, sheds some light on the influencing criteria of these phenomena. So, what happens cognitively as a person makes meaning of entities, phenomenon, and events through the reasoning process including subprocesses of perceiving and interpreting associations to race. </p>


Author(s):  
Prof. Bhavesh Anant Chavan

When we hear about science, a certain fear of formulae, complex reactions and theories comes to our mind. But have we ever thought of science as a concept beyond the textbooks? If we can understand how things work, why certain things happen the way we see them or what causes certain phenomena, science will no longer be limited to textbooks. The best way of familiarizing society to science is to first simplify it to an extent where the common man understands it not as magic but as a happening with proper reasoning. As per my opinion, science is the way of thinking how and why things happen around us. The reason gives the science behind it. Science has the power of existence. Science is not a subject to learn; it is the power of thinking. In a world where technology surpasses everything, science has still managed to find utmost importance in everyday life. Without science, technology wouldn't flourish and without technology, science would not have got the respect it deserves. I don’t know why, but we have divided science into different branches,for example physics, chemistry, mathematics and biology etc. Now they have become major subjects and have been divided into smaller branches. I think, these different branches or subjects are nothing but the various ways of thinking over the same problem. Science is all about understanding. All branches of science have made tremendous progress in giving directions to thoughts and ideas. This has ultimately led mankind to make advancements in all areas related to science. Whenever there is a new discovery or invention, it proves that we are taking science a step ahead, making it more accessible to the common man and in the course providing solutions to even the smallest of problems. If you don’t understand science, you will continuously feel that magics are happening in nature. There is nothing magical in the world of science, only our sense of power has some limits and that is why we are unable to experience or sense the waves and tiny matters. There are lots of phenomena happening in nature continuously with a reason. If we want to understand the reason behind it then we will definitely have to convert that reason into technology. Science is truly a fascinating world, where we see the tiniest inventions becoming the biggest comfort or the biggest discoveries helping mankind to leap forward without any hurdles. It is only due to the understanding of science, more importantly rocket science, that the sky is now no longer a limit. Man has also been able to give a reasonable scientific explanation to most of the so-called magical phenomena of nature. It is only because of science which is the backbone of technology, that man is able to achieve the comfort of happy living, by decoding problems while treading on the path of innovative thinking. So, every student has to learn conceptual basic science. You can understand science once you start thinking in a proper way. Every student needs to generate the habit of thinking on any problem. This will slowly decrease the fear about science. Lastly, to conclude I want to say that Science is the sixth sense for human beings so try to use it to experience the lovely and fascinating world.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document