Calling all intentional agents!! Evolution, Creation, and simple chat?

Tomasello claims that we must begin our understanding of human cognition by exploring how human beings came to be; by an evolutionalists' view of evolving from the ape species. I disagree with his position based on a different view shared by many people in the world. I am referring to the Christian belief system that God created mankind in his own image (Genesis, The Holy Bible). I don't believe that God is an ape, and thus I feel that mankind was created by God as one species, and not a species that came to be after millions of years with great ancestors that are apes. There are multiple theories and explanations of how we got here (some scientific and some religious) that would dispute Tomasello's pure evolutionary account. Based on the fact that evolution as the beginning point for humans has not been proven as a fact, the author should present alternative views for the origins of human cognition in a neutral way.

I found Tomasello's arguments to be biased and weak. He argues against common beliefs such as nonhuman primates having an understanding of others as intentional agents; put simpler, the awareness of other members in their species having goals for their actions, but his only evidence is his own research (Tomasello, 1999). I am not doubting his role as a well-established and educated researcher, however, he references himself far too much which gives me the impression that his position is biased. I also found that his examples focused on limited sources of chimps and infants/ young children (presumeably from middle-class Western culture). It would have been beneficial to read about studies conducted on infants/ children from different cultures/ languages. Another area I was interested in learning about but wasn't mentioned or covered by Tomasello was if there was any research on twins with respect to the learning processes of infants/ young children. I am curious to know how twins would respond in some of the studies (especially studies that conclude that infants are able to cognitively do certain things at certain points and in a specific order; 9 months, 12 months, etc.) given that they would have been exposed to the same cultural experiences (my assumption is that they are raised in the same household).

I am not suggesting that I challenge all of Tomasello's points. In fact he has made some very persuasive claims of how humans are different than other animals on a social-cognitive level, and provided descriptions of studies that appeared reliable (his own research and that of others). In fact, he is right on the money when he states that the social shared learning that exists in human culture sets us apart from other primates. It is through our complex language systems and cultural bonds that we can share knowledge and build on/ modify our accomplishments. Our ability to communicate and share information allows us to collaboratively learn and advance together (Tomasello, 1999). I believe that other animals are capable of simple language systems that we will probably never understand. Animals can't talk our human languages. Parrots and some other animals can learn words or phrases but this does not result in them being able to carry a functional flowing conversation with another person. Just as we can bark with dogs but it doesn't equate to shared social dialogue. Many animals can produce a range of vocalizations, and I feel that these are forms of simple language in which they are capable of some variation of shared understanding. For example, dogs have different barks/ sounds in different situations: playful barking with other dogs, angry barking at dogs where there is a threat/ conflict,  barking to inform owner of an intruder, growling, etc. Especially with examples where dogs are interacting with each other, I believe they have the ability to understand some meaning when they exchange sounds.

If the main message that Tomasello wants to share is how our species is unique in the fact that we have culture and can come together with a shared social purpose, then why does he push his evolutionary position so hard? It would be perfectly fine for him to declare his view as a possibility, however, he should skip the lengthy conversion-style evolution introduction. There are many parts of his writing that I disagree with, however, there are also many aspects that I completely agree with. I will close for now as I have plans to share knowledge with other intentional agents over a nice tall glass of wine!

 References

The Holy Bible: King James Version. (1974). New York: Penguin Books USA Inc.

Tomasello, M. (1999). The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge Mass.: Harvard

             University Press.

Picture # 1: http://biologos.org/questions/early-interpretations-of-genesis

Picture # 2: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1070671/Evolution-stops-Future-Man-look-says-scientist.html