Language and socialized communication were not mutually inclusive. The two did not exist due to nascent egoselfishness, interrelational cogency and objective cogency. Introvertive structure re: egoselfishness is predicate.
There was no generation of evolution where ‘early humans’ were immediately talking/making sounds (to each other or even to themself)…this is not even close to ‘chicken or egg’ debate…for logic is the fact that the first utterance of cogency sound aka deliberate directed, intradependent social communication aka language communication having been predicated on the biological’s psychology’s process manifestation rooted of ego-centric emotives…would still require the receiving (listener) to be also be as evolved enough to comprehend that that sound was directed at them (which requires egoselfish objectification).
Human analogy would, very crudely-speaking, would be if you’re sitting in a crowded room and someone calls out “hey you!” yet you don’t hear/realize that they’re calling (at) you. You hear sounds yet there is no registration in your own consciousness (introvertive egoselfishness) that they are directing at you their audio articulation of voice…I strongly posit that early human would not have comprehension that the ‘other person’ grunting/moaning or whatever sounds directed at them was doing so communicatively. This requires generational evolutional time scale.
The early human would have had to register their own sound-making (introvertive egoselfish) by listening to themself and realize they were making noise deliberately instead of consequentially or self-recognize psychosomatically. Hence objectification is required for egocentric and egoselfishness and the foundation of introversion.
A recent article discussing the ‘biological semantics’ of which came first…the chicken…or the egg. https://www.livescience.com/which-came-first-the-chicken-or-the-egg
Chicken or Egg…evolutionally the chicken developed first and only as it is the genetic biology in which the egg simply contained the chicken. The egg is simply the container.
Unless it’s the abstract, pedantic debate to which is still the chicken came first as the developmental biology pre-existing upon its conception inside the container holding the (last generation of the pre-)chicken…and that particular egg would be the very first generation ‘container’ of the very first generation of the chicken species (which is subjective on its own merit, based on the existing total species population; evolutionally-speaking).
Which is of the same concept that a human adult is still the human infant, aged. Whether inside mommy or outside mommy…it’s a biological semantic that seems rather a wry waste of academics’ time, imo.
By the same question; it would be literally impossible to identify exactly when evolution shifted into the recognition of the ‘official’ genetic structure of the biological-human due to time variants of individual of the human species (various human taxonomies…and where the simplistic complexity of Darwin’s brilliance is profound). So it’s just another generalization relative to the wholesale of the (individual) species, genera and taxonomies. It’s scientifically semantical.
Which means following only one specific individual genealogy which then requires needing to default to identifying via mass population randomness in achieving a qualifying (scientifically-agreed) biological definition majority under that prescription such of an ‘official human’ under specific, albeit gross scaled, species prescription. Of course, it’s all very, very graduated as per evolutional time scale.
Always the chicken, regardless male or female cells…the egg is simply the container…and language social construct is purely an act of evolutional consciousness.
This is incorrect:
https://www.socsci.uci.edu/newsevents/news/2022/2022-08-08-futrell-when-was-talking-invented.php
This omits egoselfishness and introvertive structure wasn’t cogently sophisticated/evolved. And this experiment is so far off-base that I have, uhm, no words…
https://www.science.org/content/article/human-language-may-have-evolved-help-our-ancestors-make-tools In other words, without comprehension of construction of consciousness, these are academic fumbles with no recovery. Hence the desolation of comprehension of consciousness…and without comprehension of disaggregative structure…the fumble leads the world astray.
#TheSoulOfaDog #TheSoulOfaDogBook #ArfArfBarkBark