The Cradle of Humankind

This chapter explores the relationship between parenting and technology from an evolutionary perspective. The exploration is organized around the “three styles” framework for understanding and differentiating between the three major evolutionary approaches to the study of human behavior: evolutionary psychology, human behavioral ecology, and dual inheritance theory. For each of these evolutionary approaches, the chapter provides two examples of the relationship between parenting and technology, one related to childbearing and the other related to childrearing. Is the evolutionary approach a useful one to understand this relationship? First, although each has as its focus the application of evolutionary theory to the study of human behavior, each of the three styles brings a different set of assumptions and priorities. Second, an evolutionary perspective points to specific, and theoretically justified, behavioral concomitants of technological change.

The Development of Archaeology in Africa

Africa is the cradle of humankind, with the origin, evolution, and dispersal of hominids understood from this continent. It was not left out in the quest for knowledge on how human beings lived in the past, where they lived, what they used and ate, as well as changes that occurred through time. The development of archaeology in Africa, as elsewhere, had two aspects to it—the volume and inclination of work done as evidenced by extensive fieldwork and publications, and the change in approach that saw a shift toward philosophical and methodological concerns. Terminology broadened as there was a shift from merely establishing evidence of occupation and the presence of material culture, to studying the subtleties and processes underlying the material culture. The human mind is complex; it generated a dynamic material culture temporally and spatially, and notwithstanding the environmental impact on past cultures, humanity also colonized landscapes. Appreciation of an interchange between humanity and the environment became necessary to sync and contextualize the development of ideas, concepts, and worldviews, and whether they emerged from within societies or were externally influenced, they were shared across time and space—necessitating multidisciplinary approaches to studying the past. To an archaeological scholar in Africa, the problem is compounded. The study of the past has always been from an observer’s point of view, resulting in the call to “decolonize archaeology”—Africans were alienated in studying the past and the tendency was to have them not see this past as their heritage. Archaeology must be relevant to Africa’s issues of environmental management, food security, and socioeconomic challenges such as youth and women’s empowerment. What can the discipline offer? Is the archaeology of Africa accessible to its population, and do we see possibilities for an intergenerational beneficiation of Africa’s past? Most importantly, Africa still has a wealth of knowledge to offer in the study of the paleoenvironment, human evolution, food production and processing, historical ecology, multidisciplinary approaches, and computer technology. Their contribution to a better understanding of the rich, complex, and dynamic African past is of utmost importance.

Phenomenology of the Life-World and Naturalistic Epistemology

This paper aims to reveal parallels between the phenomenological concept of the life-world in Edmund Husserl and Maurice Merleau-Ponty and the naturalistic epistemology of Gerhard Vollmer, in which a central concept is the mesocosmos (“world of medium size”). Such a comparison is necessary because the concepts of life-world and mesocosmos are quite similar in content, since they both refer to the human dimension of our world experience, to our natural position in the world. However, these concepts are far from identical. In Husserl’s case, the world of life is the world of pre-scientific experience taking place before scientific idealizations. According to Merleau-Ponty, the world of life is primarily a world of perceptual experience, in which I participate not as a subject of culture, but as an anonymous subject of perception, as a living perceptive body. Both philosophers call for a return to the life-world as a ground of scientific idealizations in order to overcome a crisis brought about by an excessive trust in scientific knowledge and “objectifying thinking”. In turn, Vollmer interprets the mesocosmos as a “world of medium size” that we can successfully explore due to the evolutionary adaptation of our cognitive abilities. This is our “ecological niche”, but while Husserl and Merleau-Ponty encourage us to return to this “cradle of humankind” to take root in it, Vollmer emphasizes that we are not bound to our ecological niche and can expand our knowledge both in the direction of the microworld and in the direction of the “world of mega scales”. He calls this process the objectification and deanthropomorphization of our picture of the world, and this is, in his view, the main trend of the development of scientific knowledge in its history, which is supported by the views of some prominent scientists of the 20th century.

Repositioning of Africa in knowledge production: shaking off historical stigmas � introduction

Africa is recognised as the cradle of humankind with a proven record of creativity and innovation as evidenced by its great empires and kingdoms. It is thus an enigma that currently Africa contributes only 2% to global knowledge production, a situation that is widely believed to account for its underdevelopment. Even though scholarly disagreement cuts very deep here, it is mostly due to the reasons of the status quo rather than to disputing the poor showing of Africa in global knowledge production. The high quality of articles presented in this supplementary issue showcases our conviction that Africa can indeed shake off historical stigmas and reposition itself as a giant in knowledge production. This editorial introduces the contributions in the issue which interrogates the status quo and explores ways in which knowledge production can be enhanced. Three key thematic approaches are presented: a decolonial approach to legitimising African knowledge based on its needs, culture, and heritage; development of robust knowledge production and quality assurance institutions; and inclusive education and knowledge production.

A summary of the history of exploration at the Sterkfontein Caves in the Cradle of Humankind World Heritage Site

Sterkfontein Caves, near Pretoria, South Africa, are part of the Cradle of Humankind World Heritage Site. The caves have yielded hundreds of hominin fossils recovered over a period spanning more than a century. Exploration of the deposits has occurred in three phases. In the first phase from 1895–1935, fossils of various animals were recovered unsystematically by limestone miners, who noted fossiliferous breccias. The second phase, from 1936–1966, involved teams led by Robert Broom and John Robinson. Broom and Robinson’s excavations recovered many hominin fossils from Members 4 and 5, stone artifacts, and initial mapping of the Sterkfontein deposits. The third phase, 1966 until the present, included excavations led by Philip Tobias, Alun Hughes, Tim Partridge, Ron Clarke, Kathy Kuman, and Dominic Stratford. During this phase, the six members of the Sterkfontein deposits were recognized and characterized, and additional fossils of hominins and other fauna, as well as stone artifacts were recovered. Importantly, extensive analysis of fauna and paleonvironments was conducted. Hominin fossils were also recovered from Member 2. Considerable geochronological work has been done to characterize the complex stratigraphy and dating of these deposits. This chapter reviews the history of fieldwork at Sterkfontein.