Investigating Neanderthal Intelligence Through Artifacts

[fluidistic]

I am wondering how reliable it is to gauge the intelligence of say homo neanderthalensis by looking at whether they were "artists", and by the object they used. I understand that the fact that they used Levallois technique to cut flint indicates some sort of intelligence. But the lack of, say, pyramids or writings, does not mean they were not intelligent enough to do these things.

Homo sapiens (our species) exists since many decades of thousands of years. However if we had been extinguished about 10,000 years ago and some other intelligent species would have found what we had done till then, they would not have found most of civilization, no writing whatsoever, no abstract mathematics, etc. However these humans living 10,000 years ago were not much different from the ones of today (evolution within this species occurs but isn't that fast either), so even though they did not display these features, these humans would have been fully capable to endure our modern world if they were born today. Their brains had the capacity to learn topology, even though the objects they used were (seemingly) extremely basics.

The point is that I wonder how intelligent would neanderthaliens fare in today's world. If we cannot rely on judging what they displayed to be capable of in their time, how else can we judge? Physical evidence pointed towards a larger brain volume than our species, although the frontal cortex seems to be smaller, etc. But is that any better than looking at their vestiges?

 

[BillTre]

I agree that modern techniques, similar to archeology, are going to be missing huge amounts of data dealing with intelligence.
Much more recent old textiles for example are not often found.

how else can we judge?

Genetically recreate the Neanderthals from published DNA sequences.
Study their intelligence.
However, not something that will happen soon.

 

[256bits]

I am wondering how reliable it is to gauge the intelligence of say homo neanderthalensis by looking at whether they were "artists", and by the object they used.

Can one determine "intelligence" through examination of culture and/or technology?
A biased opinion can lead to incompleteness.

Recent Example- who would be considered more intelligent? - the South American Incas or the Europeans who brought turmoil to their society.

 

[StatGuy2000]

Can one determine "intelligence" through examination of culture and/or technology?
A biased opinion can lead to incompleteness.

Recent Example- who would be considered more intelligent? - the South American Incas or the Europeans who brought turmoil to their society.

Questions about "intelligence" among different species is always a tricky matter. This is especially compounded when we are referring to species that are extinct, because any information we gather will always be indirect. That being said, I think looking at the fossils of say, artwork, tools, etc. that can be conclusively linked to Neanderthals can give us a clue as to the cognitive capacities that Neanderthals possessed. (Note I used the word "conclusively" -- I am curious as to how tools and artwork can be linked in any conclusive matter to Neanderthals as opposed to other hominid species).

Now in terms of your hypothetical example -- since both the Incas and Europeans are from the same species (homo sapiens), they would thus possesses the same intelligence, as do all other humans in the world. The specific technological advancements possessed were obviously different, but that is as much a matter of historical accident as anything else.

 

[Vanadium 50]

. The specific technological advancements possessed were obviously different, but that is as much a matter of historical accident as anything else.

I agree. The problem with Neandertals is that we have only their artifacts by which to judge - "specific technological advancements". I think your argument implies there is too much noise in the system to draw any conclusion.

 

[256bits]

That being said, I think looking at the fossils of say, artwork, tools, etc. that can be conclusively linked to Neanderthals can give us a clue as to the cognitive capacities that Neanderthals possessed. (Note I used the word "conclusively" -- I am curious as to how tools and artwork can be linked in any conclusive matter to Neanderthals as opposed to other hominid species).

I looked up the Wiki on Neanderthal, and it very encompassing in the their(Neanderthal ) description.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal

 

[BWV]

its also tied in with to capacity with language, and its unknown whether they anatomically could speak

 

[Fervent Freyja]

Not reliable at all. There are many, many humans alive today that they could still surpass in intelligence.

They would pass just fine. We have many mentally disabled humans that are able to survive independently nowadays. We can even teach apes how to communicate with us- I imagine it’d be at least slightly more teachable to neanderthals.

 

[StatGuy2000]

I agree. The problem with Neandertals is that we have only their artifacts by which to judge - "specific technological advancements". I think your argument implies there is too much noise in the system to draw any conclusion.

I would largely agree with you -- there is certainly too much noise in the system to draw any definitive conclusions on the "intelligence" (or more specifically cognitive capacities) of Neandertals.

I would also add that inferences based on indirect artifacts could quite possibly lead to multiple hypotheses with respect to cognitive capacities of Neandertals, and it may be hard put to decide which hypotheses are better supported by the data.

 

[Vanadium 50]

There is also the issue of what it means to be "intelligent". Suppose it was known that Neandertals were better at mental arithmetic than modern humans, but worse with language ability. What would that mean? More intelligent? Less? The same?

Do we mean that they would score better on an SAT test? How would one make sure it wasn't culturally biased?

The "Thagomizer" is a part of which animal?
A. Triceratops
B. Stegosaurus
C. Dimetrodon
D. Ptreodactyl
E. Tyrannosaurus Rex