Neurofilosofía y Pensamiento Actual Neurophilosophy and Contemporary Thought: human evolution

Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta human evolution. Mostrar todas las entradas

viernes, 7 de agosto de 2026

The Human Journey: From the Makapansgat Pebble to the Far Reaches of the Cosmos

Bernabé Mallo

Doctor en Filosofía por la Universidad del País Vasco (UPV/EHU)
Investigador en neurofilosofía, evolución humana y origen del arte. / PhD in Philosophy – University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU)
Researcher in neurophilosophy, human evolution, and the origins of art.

A reflection on the origin of art and the continuity of the species through the lens of Clottes, Menninghaus, and Henshilwood

Introduction: a simple and complex question

What connects an australopithecine who collected a pebble shaped like a face, a Palaeolithic artist who ventured into the depths of a cave to paint a bison, an Egyptian educator who protected young people with amulets and teachings, and a contemporary astronaut who gazes at Earth from space? The answer, perhaps, is simpler than it seems: they are all children of the same species, bearers of the same symbolic heritage, driven by the same urge toward survival, meaning, and wholeness.

Let us begin with a lived experience. The Guaraní peoples of Paraguay, like so many other indigenous cultures, demonstrate an extraordinary knowledge of their natural environment and its possibilities for survival. They know the plants, the animals, the cycles, the dangers. They know how to move, how to protect themselves, how to obtain resources. This knowledge is not an exception: it is the norm in every human culture that has depended directly on its environment. The educational systems of ancient Egypt, for their part, show us another aspect of this same capacity: childhood was protected through advanced teachings and amulets that safeguarded children from environmental threats . Survival was not only physical, but also symbolic.

If knowledge of the environment generates confidence, and confidence drives exploration, then the history of our species is the history of a continuous expansion. We know our environment, we feel safe, and we venture to investigate other lands, other cultures, other worlds. Thus it was in the past, and thus it continues today. The question we pose is, therefore, a question about the continuity of the human: what happened that led an australopithecine to carry a stone like the Makapansgat pebble to its home? What happened that led the artists of Altamira or Lascaux to paint animals in difficult-to-access areas, almost hidden? What happened that led the Egyptians to develop such advanced educational systems? And what is happening today with space travellers?

The enigma of Makapansgat: the first symbolic gesture

The Makapansgat pebble, a reddish jasper stone weighing about 260 grams, was found in 1925 in a cave in South Africa, several kilometres from its nearest natural source . Its natural marks and wear give it a striking resemblance to a human face. It was neither carved nor modified by human hands. It was collected and transported. Why?

The answer, though uncertain, is fascinating. Someone —an australopithecine, perhaps, or some other early hominin— saw in that stone something more than a stone. They saw a face. And they did not only see it: they valued it enough to carry it with them, to make it part of their home, to keep it in an inhabited space .

This seemingly trivial gesture is the earliest evidence of a capacity that defines us as a species: the capacity to recognise symbols, to see beyond immediate reality, to attribute meaning to objects that have no practical utility. The Makapansgat pebble was not used for cutting, striking, or protecting. It served to be looked at. And in looking at it, the one who found it saw themselves reflected in it.

The discoveries at Blombos Cave, with their engraved ochre pieces over 70,000 years old, confirm that this symbolic capacity was not an isolated accident . The abstract geometric patterns engraved on these pieces are not representations of animals or people. They are symbols: arbitrary conventions created to express shared concepts, whose meaning has been lost but whose symbolic intention is indisputable . As Christopher Henshilwood notes, "these finds demonstrate that ochre use in the MSA was not exclusively utilitarian and, arguably, the transmission and sharing of the meaning of the engravings relied on fully syntactical language" .

Cave art: why hide beauty?

If the Blombos engravings show us the capacity to create symbols, the paintings of Altamira and Lascaux show us the capacity to hide them. The animals represented in these caves are not at the entrances, nor in the illuminated areas. They are in the depths, in narrow galleries, in difficult-to-access places . Why?

Jean Clottes, in his article on the interpretation of prehistoric art, reviews the main theories that have attempted to answer this question . The theory of "art for art's sake", which saw in these works mere entertainment or ornamentation, was abandoned precisely because it could not explain why they were produced in such remote and dark places. The theory of sympathetic magic, which interpreted them as rituals to ensure hunting success, also failed to account for all the evidence: the animals represented were not always the most hunted, and wounded or pierced figures are surprisingly rare .

The most recent hypothesis, defended by Clottes together with David Lewis-Williams, is that of Palaeolithic shamanism . According to this interpretation, the deep caves were perceived as the realm of spirits, as gateways to the supernatural world. Entering them was therefore a form of shamanic journey, a search for contact with the forces that governed the world. The paintings and engravings would be the materialisation of the visions obtained during trance, and the natural reliefs of the walls —which could evoke animal forms— would be deliberately used to "free" the spirits from the rock .

This hypothesis offers an answer to the questions we posed. The animals represented were not the most consumed because they were not hunting objects, but auxiliary spirits: beings encountered by the shaman in their visions, whose power they sought to channel. The representation in difficult-to-access areas was not a whim, but a necessity: the journey to the underground world was a metaphor for the journey to the spirit world, and the difficulty of access was part of the ritual. The caves were not hiding places, but sanctuaries: places where the community could enter into contact with the sacred.

The restless traveller: from Altamira to outer space

If Palaeolithic art was a form of spiritual journey, our species has never ceased to travel. The hominins who collected the Makapansgat pebble, the artists who painted in the depths of the caves, the educators who protected the children of ancient Egypt, and the astronauts who today explore space share a common characteristic: dissatisfaction with the present, the need to go further, to explore, to know, to transcend.

This travelling drive is not a cultural accident. It is a consequence of our symbolic capacity, of our capacity to symbolise what is not present and to desire what does not yet exist. The space traveller is no different from the Palaeolithic hunter who ventured into a dark cave, nor the Polynesian navigator who crossed the Pacific in canoes, nor the explorer who mapped unknown continents. They are all bearers of the same heritage: the capacity to imagine a beyond and to act to reach it.

The technology that enables these journeys —from the Blombos bone tools to space rockets— is also a manifestation of the same symbolic capacity . The Blombos bone tools, about 70,000 years old, are not merely useful objects. They are products of a sequence of deliberate technical choices, requiring planning, knowledge, and transmission of skills . They are, in this sense, the Palaeolithic equivalent of a spacecraft: the result of a mind that thinks long-term, anticipates needs, and designs solutions for future problems.

Towards a synthesis: art as testimony to human continuity

Winfried Menninghaus, in his book Aesthetics after Darwin, proposes a "cooptation" model to explain the multiple origins of the human arts . According to this model, art emerged when three ancient and largely independent adaptations —sensory biases linked to sexual selection, play behaviour, and technology— came together and were transformed by human capacities for symbolic cognition and language . Art, from this perspective, is not a specific adaptation for a concrete function, but a new behavioural variant that emerged from the confluence of several evolutionary factors .

This model fits perfectly with the continuity we have traced from Makapansgat to space exploration. The capacity to recognise a face in a stone (sensory bias), the curiosity to explore the unknown (play behaviour), and the ability to make tools that allow us to reach further (technology) combined with symbolic capacity to create art, to travel, to educate, to transcend.

The question we posed at the beginning —what connects the australopithecine, the Palaeolithic artist, the Egyptian educator, and the astronaut— thus finds an answer: they are all manifestations of the same unique neuronal function, which we have called S/Y/C:

S (Survival): the need to know the environment, to protect oneself, to ensure the continuity of life. The Guaraní who knows the jungle, the Egyptian who protects their children, the astronaut who keeps their spacecraft functioning: they are all attending to survival.
Y (Symbolon): the capacity to create and share symbols, to attribute meaning to objects and actions. The australopithecine who sees a face in a stone, the artist who paints a bison in a cave, the Egyptian who makes an amulet, the astronaut who plants a flag on the Moon: they are all creating symbolon.
C (Wholeness): the drive toward totality, the need to close a cycle, to achieve a goal. The traveller who enters the cave, the explorer who crosses the ocean, the astronaut who reaches space: they are all seeking wholeness, the sensation of having arrived somewhere.

Final considerations: the species that never stops travelling

The history of our species is the history of a continuous journey. It began with a faltering step out of Africa, continued with the exploration of all continents, and today takes us to the far reaches of the solar system. But the journey is not only physical. It is also spiritual, symbolic, interior. Art, religion, philosophy, science, and technology are the different forms this journey has taken.

The Makapansgat pebble, the paintings of Altamira, the Blombos bone tools, the Egyptian amulets, and today's spacecraft are all milestones on the same path: the path of a species that is not satisfied with what it has, that always wants to go further, that never stops asking what lies on the other side.

And on this path, what we carry with us is always the same: our capacity to symbolise, to create meaning, to seek wholeness. That is what makes us human. And that is what, probably, will continue to accompany us as the journey continues.

References

Clottes, J. (2003). De « l'art pour l'art » au chamanisme : l'interprétation de l'art préhistorique. La revue pour l'histoire du CNRS, (8). https://doi.org/10.4000/histoire-cnrs.553

Henshilwood, C. S., d'Errico, F., Marean, C. W., Milo, R. G., & Yates, R. (2001). An early bone tool industry from the Middle Stone Age at Blombos Cave, South Africa: Implications for the origins of modern human behaviour, symbolism and language. Journal of Human Evolution, 41(6), 631–678. https://doi.org/10.1006/jhev.2001.0515

Henshilwood, C. S., d'Errico, F., Yates, R., Jacobs, Z., Tribolo, C., Duller, G. A. T., Mercier, N., Sealy, J. C., Valladas, H., Watts, I., & Wintle, A. G. (2002). Emergence of modern human behavior: Middle Stone Age engravings from South Africa. Science, 295(5558), 1278–1280. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1067575

Henshilwood, C. S., d'Errico, F., & Watts, I. (2009). Engraved ochres from the Middle Stone Age levels at Blombos Cave, South Africa. Journal of Human Evolution, 57(1), 27–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2009.02.006

Mallo, B. (2023). La construcción neuro-simbólica. Una aproximación al funcionamiento del cerebro desde una perspectiva multidisciplinar [Doctoral thesis, University of the Basque Country - Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea]. ADDI Repository. http://hdl.handle.net/10810/62701

Mallo, B. (2025). Arte y biología: Una aproximación neurofilosófica al origen de la experiencia estética. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0E8Y5WZMK

Mallo, B. (2025). Art and biology: A neurophilosophical approach to the origin of aesthetic experience. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0E8Y6C2XN

Mallo, B. (2026a). De la filosofía quirúrgica a la ley de coherencia biológica S/Y/C: Hacia una investigación sobre el origen del arte en la especie Homo. https://isbn.bibna.gub.uy/catalogo.php?mode=detalle&nt=57196

Mallo, B. (2026a). De la filosofía quirúrgica a la ley de coherencia biológica S/Y/C: Hacia una investigación sobre el origen del arte en la especie Homo [Kindle edition]. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GYGTJD5C

Mallo, B. (2026b). From surgical philosophy to the law of biological coherence S/Y/C: Toward a study of the origin of art in the Homo lineage. https://isbn.bibna.gub.uy/catalogo.php?mode=detalle&nt=57197

Menninghaus, W. (2019). Aesthetics after Darwin: The multiple origins and functions of the arts (A. Berlina, Trans.). Academic Studies Press. (Original work published 2011)

Autor / Author

Bernabé Mallo
Doctor en Filosofía – Universidad del País Vasco / Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (UPV/EHU)
Investigador independiente en neurofilosofía, evolución humana y origen del arte.

Bernabé Mallo
PhD in Philosophy – University of the Basque Country / Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (UPV/EHU)
Independent researcher in neurophilosophy, human evolution, and the origin of art.

Enlaces / Links

Página de autor Amazon / Amazon Author Page: https://www.amazon.com/author/bernabemallo
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9002-9728
Plataforma EHUenRed / Link EHUenRed: https://www.ehu.eus/es/web/masterrak-eta-graduondokoak/red-latinoamericana-de-posgrados
Canal YouTube / Channel YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@neuroideas815
Canal YouTube / Channel YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCBsf6OZ482NjST6QA-hvYtQ
Publicaciones y proyectos en desarrollo / Publications and projects:
https://www.amazon.com/author/bernabemallo
https://ehuenred.theglocal.network/ideas/el-origen-del-arte-en-el-cerebro-de-makapansgat-al-moma-del-primate-al-sapiens

viernes, 24 de julio de 2026

Bones That Speak: The World's Oldest Bone Tool Industry and the Origin of Modern Behavior

Bernabé Mallo

A review of the discovery by Henshilwood and colleagues (2001): An early bone tool industry from the Middle Stone Age at Blombos Cave, South Africa: implications for the origins of modern human behaviour, symbolism and language

Introduction: when bone becomes technology

What distinguishes a modern human from their more archaic ancestors? Not only anatomy —the rounded skull, the less prominent jaw— but something more difficult to trace in the fossil record: the capacity to plan, to execute complex technical sequences, to create tools that do not imitate the shape of stone but exploit the properties of other materials. For decades, archaeologists have considered the manufacture of bone tools to be a key marker of modern behavior. And for decades, it was thought that this behavior had emerged in Europe about 40,000 years ago, as part of the "symbolic explosion" of the Upper Paleolithic (Henshilwood et al., 2001).

A discovery published in 2001 in the Journal of Human Evolution by Christopher Henshilwood and an international team of researchers radically changed this narrative (Henshilwood et al., 2001). In Blombos Cave, on the southern coast of South Africa, they recovered 28 bone tools from Middle Stone Age (MSA) levels dating to about 70,000 years ago. This is the largest collection of formal bone tools found at a single African MSA site, and its existence demonstrates that sophisticated bone technology is not a European invention, but a much earlier African innovation (Henshilwood et al., 2001).

These tools, which include awls and projectile points, were manufactured following a sequence of deliberate technical choices: blank selection, shaping using various techniques, and final finishing (Henshilwood et al., 2001). Their presence, together with other finds at the same site —engraved ochre, bifacial stone points, and a diversified subsistence economy— is "turning the tide in favour of models positing behavioural modernity in Africa at a time far earlier than previously accepted" (Henshilwood et al., 2001, p. 631).

The Blombos discovery: 28 tools that rewrite history

Between 1992 and 2000, excavations at Blombos Cave —a rock shelter overlooking the Indian Ocean on the Western Cape of South Africa— brought to light 28 bone tools, recovered in situ from MSA levels dating to about 70,000 years ago (Henshilwood et al., 2001). This is the largest collection of formal bone tools found at a single African MSA site, and its detailed study has revealed a degree of technical sophistication that contradicts traditional models of the origin of modern behavior.

Microscopic and morphometric analyses show that these tools were not manufactured casually or improvisationally. They follow a structured production sequence that includes: (1) the production of a rough blank; (2) the application of various shaping methods; and (3) the final finishing of the artifact to produce awls and projectile points (Henshilwood et al., 2001). The manufacturing techniques are comparable to those described for "formal" bone tools from other contexts, and their planning and execution are consistent with those of the late Holocene, indicating a continuity in cognitive and technical capacity over tens of thousands of years (Henshilwood et al., 2001).

The assemblage includes tools that were probably used for working hides (the awls) and others that may have served as hunting weapons (the projectile points). The presence of these tools in the MSA is particularly notable because, as the authors note, "bone tools are rarely found in African Middle or Later Stone Age sites before ca. 25 ka" (Henshilwood et al., 2001, p. 631). Their scarcity had been cited as evidence of a lack of modern technological or cognitive capacities before ca. 50 ka. The Blombos discovery demonstrates that this scarcity is not due to an incapacity, but probably to preservation biases and limited archaeological research in Africa (Henshilwood et al., 2001).

The context: more than tools, symbolic behavior

The Blombos bone tools do not appear in isolation. They are part of a body of evidence pointing to fully modern behavior in the African MSA. Alongside the bone tools, researchers have documented:

Deliberate engravings on ochre, with abstract geometric patterns, demonstrating the capacity to create and share symbols (Henshilwood et al., 2002).
Bifacial stone points crafted with great skill, suggesting a high degree of planning and technical expertise.
Sophisticated subsistence strategies, including the hunting of terrestrial and marine animals, fishing, and shellfish collection, indicating a diversified exploitation of the environment and a deep knowledge of available resources.

This combination of evidence —advanced bone technology, symbolism, complex lithic artifacts, and an adaptive economy— is exactly the kind of "package" of behaviors that archaeologists have traditionally used to identify "modernity" in the archaeological record. And at Blombos, it appears 35,000 years earlier than it is documented in Europe (Henshilwood et al., 2001).

As Henshilwood himself noted in an interview at the time, "the real implications are that there was modern human behavior in Africa about 35,000 years before Europe" . Or, as another team member, Curtis Marean, put it: "Once again, in terms of human evolution, we're seeing that Africa was precocious: bipedal hominids evolved in Africa; the first real increase in brain size happened in Africa; and now, we're beginning to see that the last great advance, the development of modern behavior, also happened in Africa" .

Why are these tools important?

The importance of the Blombos discovery transcends the antiquity of the tools. Its significance lies in what it reveals about the human mind and the origin of technical and symbolic capacity.

1. They dismantle the myth of the European "symbolic explosion"

For a long time, archaeologists argued that modern behavior emerged suddenly and explosively in Europe about 40,000 years ago, in what was called the "symbolic explosion" of the Upper Paleolithic (Henshilwood et al., 2001). The Blombos bone tools, together with the ochre engravings and other finds, demonstrate that this narrative is wrong. Advanced bone technology and symbolic behavior did not suddenly emerge in Eurasia; they have much deeper roots in Africa, where anatomically modern humans had existed for tens of thousands of years.

2. They evidence the presence of syntactic language

The manufacture of formal bone tools —which require a sequence of technical decisions, long-term planning, and the transmission of knowledge— is indirect evidence for the existence of fully syntactic language (Henshilwood et al., 2001). To transmit manufacturing techniques from one generation to the next, and to coordinate hunting and resource processing activities, MSA human groups needed a complex communication system, comparable to our own.

3. They demonstrate a cultural tradition

The presence of 28 bone tools at the same site, manufactured following the same technical sequences and for the same purposes, suggests that we are not dealing with isolated acts, but with an established cultural tradition. Technical knowledge was transmitted and refined over generations. This cultural continuity, together with the evidence of symbolism, indicates that MSA groups already possessed a social and cognitive complexity comparable to that of modern populations.

4. They broaden our understanding of the origin of art and technology

The Blombos bone tools are not "art" in the sense of a painting or a sculpture. But they are a manifestation of the same technical and symbolic capacity that would later give rise to figurative art. The manufacture of specialized tools from materials other than stone requires an understanding of material properties, forward planning, and precise hand control. These same capacities would, later, allow humans to engrave symbols on ochre or paint figures on cave walls.

Connection with research on the origin of art (S/Y/C)

The Blombos discovery resonates deeply with the research we have been developing on the S/Y/C model of neuronal functioning and the Law of Biological Coherence (Mallo, 2023, 2025, 2026a, 2026b). These tools, made by anatomically modern humans 70,000 years ago, are an early manifestation of the technical and symbolic capacity that defines our species, and can be understood in light of our three dimensions.

The S (Survival) dimension manifests in the practical function of these tools: awls for working hides, projectile points for hunting. Bone technology is not a disinterested luxury; it is a tool of adaptation that improves the ability of human groups to obtain resources, process food, make clothing, and ultimately survive. The planning and execution of these tools reflects an investment of time and effort that only makes sense within a long-term survival strategy.

The Y (Symbolon) dimension emerges in the context of these tools. They are not merely useful objects; their manufacture following standardized sequences, their transmission as cultural knowledge, and their association with other symbolic artifacts (such as the ochre engravings) indicate that they were part of a system of shared meanings. Symbolon —the act of recognition through shared codes— is not limited to language or art; it also manifests in technology, in the transmission of technical knowledge, in the group identity constructed around shared practices.

The C (Wholeness) dimension manifests in the very structure of the tools: they are finished objects, which have passed through a complete production sequence to reach their final form. This drive toward totality —the need to complete a process, to achieve a result— is the same that guides the artist when finishing a work. Technology and art share, in this sense, a common root: the need to close forms, to give coherence to matter.

Surgical Philosophy invites us to make a precise analytical cut in these findings. It is not about seeing Blombos as the "origin" of modern technology and stopping there. It is about understanding that these tools are part of a continuous process that extends to the present day. What we see at Blombos is the emergence of a capacity —the technical and symbolic capacity— that will later develop, diversify, and become more complex over tens of thousands of years.

Implications for future research

The discovery by Henshilwood and colleagues, together with other discoveries at Blombos and at other African sites (such as the bone tools from Katanda, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, or the bone points from Sibudu, in South Africa), has transformed our understanding of the origin of modern behavior. But it also opens new questions:

What other technological and symbolic innovations existed in the MSA? The presence of formal bone tools at Blombos suggests that MSA human groups already possessed a much wider technical repertoire than previously thought. What other materials did they use? What other techniques had they developed?
Why are bone tools so rare in the MSA record? If MSA humans already had the capacity to manufacture them, why do they appear in so few sites? Is it due to preservation biases (bone preserves less well than stone), to lower intensity of use, or to cultural factors?
What is the relationship between bone technology and art? The bone tools and ochre engravings appear at the same site and in the same levels. Did they share the same creators? Were they part of the same "package" of innovations? Are technical capacity and symbolic capacity related, or are they independent?
What role did these innovations play in the expansion of modern humans out of Africa? The accumulation of technological and symbolic innovations in the African MSA may have provided modern humans with an adaptive advantage that allowed them to successfully expand to other continents. But when exactly did this expansion occur, and what role did these innovations play?

Final considerations: bone as testimony to the modern mind

The discovery of the Blombos bone tools is much more than an archaeological news item. It is a window into the minds of our ancestors. It shows that, 70,000 years ago, in a cave by the sea, groups of anatomically modern humans already possessed the capacity to plan, to execute complex technical sequences, to transmit knowledge over generations, and to create artifacts that went beyond immediate need.

These tools are the testimony of a modern mind, a mind that could already think abstractly, that could already coordinate complex actions, that could already transform the world through technology. And that capacity, which is still alive today in every technology, in every work of art, in every tool we make, was not born in the caves of Eurasia 40,000 years ago. It was born in Africa, much earlier, and has been with us ever since.

As Henshilwood's team wrote in their 2001 article, the Blombos evidence, "taken together with recent finds from Klasies River, Katanda and other African Middle Stone Age sites [...] is turning the tide in favour of models positing behavioural modernity in Africa at a time far earlier than previously accepted" (Henshilwood et al., 2001, p. 631). Today we can add: and that modernity, which already existed 70,000 years ago, continues to define who we are.

References

Mallo, B. (2025). Arte y biología: Una aproximación neurofilosófica al origen de la experiencia estética. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0E8Y5WZMK

Mallo, B. (2025). Art and biology: A neurophilosophical approach to the origin of aesthetic experience. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0E8Y6C2XN

Autor / Author

Bernabé Mallo
Doctor en Filosofía – Universidad del País Vasco / Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (UPV/EHU)
Investigador independiente en neurofilosofía, evolución humana y origen del arte.

Bernabé Mallo
PhD in Philosophy – University of the Basque Country / Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (UPV/EHU)
Independent researcher in neurophilosophy, human evolution, and the origin of art.

Enlaces / Links

domingo, 19 de julio de 2026

The World's Oldest Art: When Symbolism Was Born in Africa

Bernabé Mallo

A review of the discovery by Henshilwood and colleagues (2002): Emergence of modern human behavior: Middle Stone Age engravings from South Africa

Introduction: the enigma of the modern mind

When did humans begin to behave like humans? I do not mean anatomy —walking upright or having large brains— but something more elusive: the capacity to create symbols, to communicate abstract meanings, to express something beyond immediate need. For decades, the answer seemed clear: modern behavior, including art, emerged in Eurasia some 40,000 years ago, with the splendor of the Upper Paleolithic and the paintings of Chauvet or Lascaux.

But a discovery published in the journal Science in 2002 by Christopher Henshilwood and an international team of researchers radically changed this narrative (Henshilwood et al., 2002). In Blombos Cave, on the southern coast of South Africa, they found two pieces of red ochre engraved with abstract geometric patterns. Their age: 77,000 years. That is 35,000 years before the groups of Homo sapiens that had migrated to Eurasia began to paint their caves, and 40,000 years before what many researchers considered the beginning of human art (Henshilwood et al., 2002).

The discovery, reinforced by subsequent finds —including a 73,000-year-old drawing in the same cave and engravings over 100,000 years old— forces us to rethink where and when the symbolic mind emerged. For our research on the origin of art in the Homo species, it offers crucial evidence: the artistic capacity is not a late invention of Eurasian populations, but a trait deeply rooted in our biology and cognition, already present in Africa long before modern humans dispersed to other continents.

The Blombos discovery: two engraved ochre pieces

In 1999 and 2000, excavations at Blombos Cave, a rock shelter overlooking the Indian Ocean on the Western Cape of South Africa, brought to light two pieces of red ochre that would change archaeology (Henshilwood et al., 2002).

The first piece (SAM-AA 8937), about 53 millimeters long, features a series of cross-hatched lines, with a lozenge or diagonal design, crossed by a horizontal line. The second (SAM-AA 8938), about 76 millimeters long, shows a more complex motif: a row of lozenges, bounded by parallel lines at the top and bottom, and divided by a central line that turns the lozenges into triangles (Henshilwood et al., 2002).

What makes these engravings extraordinary is not only their age, but their intentionality. Microscopic analysis revealed that the surfaces of the pieces were prepared by scraping and polishing before being engraved. The lines are not accidental marks, but deliberate incisions, made with a sharp stone tool and with precise hand control (Henshilwood et al., 2002). Moreover, the patterns are not disconnected scribbles: they show a complex geometric structure, with lines crossing at specific angles, overlapping in an orderly manner, and forming a coherent visual unit.

The study authors, led by Christopher Henshilwood (then at the South African Museum in Cape Town), argued that these motifs "suggest arbitrary conventions unrelated to reality-based cognition" (Henshilwood et al., 2002, p. 1279). That is, they do not represent animals, people, or landscapes; they are abstract symbols, whose meaning is lost to us, but which undoubtedly had meaning for those who created them.

Dating: 77,000 years of antiquity

One of the most robust aspects of the Henshilwood study is the rigorous dating of the engravings. To determine their age, the team applied two luminescence dating methods, which measure the last time minerals were exposed to heat or light (Henshilwood et al., 2002).

Thermoluminescence (TL) applied to five burnt stone pieces from the layers where the ochres were found gave a mean age of 77,000 ± 6,000 years. To confirm stratigraphic integrity, optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) was applied to quartz grains from an aeolian dune covering the site, yielding an age of 69,000 to 70,000 years (Henshilwood et al., 2002). The fact that both techniques produced consistent ages, and that the upper dune was clearly younger than the layers with the engravings, confirmed the antiquity of the pieces and ruled out the possibility of contamination by more recent materials.

These dates placed the Blombos engravings in the Middle Stone Age (MSA), a period of African prehistory spanning from about 250,000 to about 40,000 years ago. Until then, evidence of symbolic behavior in the MSA had been scarce and often ambiguous (Henshilwood et al., 2002). The Henshilwood discovery demonstrated that, at least in southern Africa, modern humans were already behaving as such 77,000 years ago.

Why are these engravings important?

The importance of the Blombos engravings transcends their antiquity. Their significance lies in what they reveal about the human mind and the origin of symbolic capacity, a capacity that, as we have seen in other reviews on this blog, is the foundation of art and culture.

1. They dismantle the "Big Bang" myth

For a long time, archaeology held that modern behavior emerged suddenly and explosively in Eurasia about 40,000 years ago, in what was called the "Upper Paleolithic revolution" (Henshilwood et al., 2002). The Blombos engravings, along with subsequent finds at the same site —including a 73,000-year-old drawing and engravings over 100,000 years old— prove this narrative wrong. Symbolic capacity did not suddenly emerge in Eurasia; it has much deeper roots in Africa, where anatomically modern humans had existed for tens of thousands of years.

2. They evidence the presence of syntactic language

One of the most powerful arguments of Henshilwood and his colleagues is that the transmission and shared meaning of these engravings "required fully syntactic language" (Henshilwood et al., 2002, p. 1280). That is, for an abstract symbol such as a geometric pattern to be understood by other members of a group, a communication system is needed that allows conventions to be agreed upon and transmitted. The Blombos engravings are therefore indirect proof that their creators possessed language as complex as our own.

3. They demonstrate a cultural tradition

The presence of multiple engraved pieces at Blombos —two in 2002, thirteen more in 2009, and a drawing in 2018— suggests that we are not dealing with isolated acts, but with a cultural tradition that extended over at least 25,000 years (Henshilwood et al., 2009). The engraving techniques, geometric patterns, and surface preparation are repeated over time, indicating that knowledge was transmitted from generation to generation.

4. They broaden our understanding of the origin of art

The Blombos engravings are not "art" in the sense of figurative painting or sculpture. But they are the oldest evidence of intentional abstract representation found to date. They represent a crucial moment in the evolution of the human mind: the moment when a useful object —ochre, perhaps used for dyeing or protection— also became a support for the symbol. A moment when someone decided to engrave a pattern that did not represent anything in the real world, but which undoubtedly meant something to them or their community.

Connection with research on the origin of art (S/Y/C)

The Blombos discovery resonates deeply with the research we have been developing on the S/Y/C model of neuronal functioning and the Law of Biological Coherence (Mallo, 2023, 2025, 2026a, 2026b). These engravings, made by anatomically modern humans, are an early manifestation of the symbolic capacity that defines our species, and can be understood in light of our three dimensions.

The S (Survival) dimension reminds us that ochre, the support for these engravings, likely had a practical function: skin protection, hide preservation, adhesive ingredient (Henshilwood et al., 2002). But the engravings go beyond that utility. They are an extension of the homeostatic function: they not only helped to survive, but allowed people to process and share experiences, regulate emotions, build group identity. Art, from its origins, was a technology of survival not only physical, but also psychological and social.

The Y (Symbolon) dimension is the one that emerges most clearly at Blombos. The geometric patterns are not representations of reality, but symbols: acts of recognition through shared codes. Whoever engraved those lines was not copying nature, but creating a new language, a new form of communication. Symbolon is the bridge between the internal world and the social world, and Blombos is one of the earliest pieces of evidence of that bridge.

The C (Wholeness) dimension manifests in the structure of the engravings themselves. They are not scattered lines, but organized patterns, with symmetry and repetition. They reflect a drive toward totality: the need to close a form, to create a coherent unit from individual lines. This drive is the same that guides the artist when composing a painting or sculpting a statue. Art, from its beginnings, has been a response to the need for order, coherence, and wholeness.

Surgical Philosophy invites us to make a precise analytical cut in these findings. It is not about seeing Blombos as the "first art" and stopping there. It is about understanding that these engravings are part of a continuous process that extends to the present day. What we see at Blombos is the emergence of a function —the symbolic function— that will later develop, diversify, and become more complex over tens of thousands of years.

Implications for future research

The Henshilwood discovery, together with subsequent discoveries at Blombos and other African sites (such as the ostrich eggshell engravings at Diepkloof, over 55,000 years old), has transformed our understanding of the origin of art and symbolic behavior. But it also opens new questions:

What exactly did these patterns mean? Henshilwood and his colleagues acknowledge that we will probably never know (Henshilwood et al., 2002). But their existence demonstrates that MSA humans already had the capacity to create and share abstract symbols.
Was there a broader tradition? The presence of similar engravings at different sites suggests that these patterns were part of a shared symbolic repertoire in southern Africa. How far did this tradition extend? Did it reach other regions?
What is the relationship between these engravings and later figurative art? The Blombos engravings are abstract. Figurative art —the representation of animals and people— does not appear in Africa until much later. Why that leap? What happened in between?
What role did these symbols play in cognition and social evolution? The creation of shared symbols not only allows communication, but also coordination of actions, formation of larger groups, and development of more complex social structures. The Blombos engravings could be one of the first tools of this social transformation.

Final considerations: the echo of an ancient mind

The discovery of the Blombos engravings is much more than an archaeological news item. It is a window into the minds of our ancestors. It shows that, 77,000 years ago, in a cave by the sea, someone took a piece of ochre and, with a stone tool, traced lines that did not represent anything in the outside world, but meant something in their inner world.

Those lines are the echo of a symbolic mind, a mind that could already think abstractly, that could already create shared meanings, that could already express something beyond immediate need. And that capacity, which is still alive today in every work of art, every poem, every song, was not born in the caves of Eurasia 40,000 years ago. It was born in Africa, much earlier, and has been with us ever since.

As Henshilwood's team wrote in their 2002 article, "in the light of this evidence, it seems that, at least in southern Africa, Homo sapiens was behaviorally modern about 77,000 years ago" (Henshilwood et al., 2002, p. 1280). Today we can add: and it still is.

References

Mallo, B. (2025). Arte y biología: Una aproximación neurofilosófica al origen de la experiencia estética. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0E8Y5WZMK

Mallo, B. (2025). Art and biology: A neurophilosophical approach to the origin of aesthetic experience. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0E8Y6C2XN

Autor / Author

Bernabé Mallo
Doctor en Filosofía – Universidad del País Vasco / Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (UPV/EHU)
Investigador independiente en neurofilosofía, evolución humana y origen del arte.

Bernabé Mallo
PhD in Philosophy – University of the Basque Country / Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (UPV/EHU)
Independent researcher in neurophilosophy, human evolution, and the origin of art.

Enlaces / Links

martes, 2 de junio de 2026

The Mistake of Thinking That Art Is a Luxury: António Damásio's Biological Theory of Art.

Bernabé Mallo

A review of The Strange Order of Things (2017) and its implications for understanding

the origin of Art

Introduction: Why do we create art?

For centuries, philosophers and art theorists have tried to answer a seemingly simple question: why do human beings create art? The answers have varied —for pleasure, for imitation of nature, for emotional expression, for the pursuit of beauty, for the need to communicate the ineffable. However, none of these explanations has managed to answer a deeper question: what biological need does art satisfy?

Portuguese neuroscientist Antonio Damásio has proposed a radically novel answer in his work The Strange Order of Things: Life, Feelings, and the Origin of Cultures (originally published in English in 2017). His thesis is surprising and, at the same time, profoundly convincing: art was not born as a pastime or an evolutionary accident, but as an absolute biological necessity in the service of homeostasis.

What is homeostasis and why is it key to understanding art?

Homeostasis is, in its classical definition, the set of processes by which living organisms maintain their internal balance —temperature, pH, glucose levels, blood pressure— in the face of environmental variations. But Damásio goes much further. For him, homeostasis is not just a physiological self-regulatory mechanism, but the fundamental organising principle of all life, from bacteria to the most complex human cultures.

"Homeostasis", writes Damásio, "is the force that ensures that life regulates itself within a range that is not only compatible with survival but also conducive to flourishing, to a projection of life into the future of an organism or a species". In other words, we do not just want to survive: we want to prosper, flourish, transcend.

Damásio's conceptual leap consists of extending this homeostatic principle from the purely biological domain to the cultural domain. Just as the body regulates its temperature to stay alive, the mind regulates its affective states through the creation of objects, practices, and ideas that we call culture. Art, music, literature, religion, philosophy, science, and technology are, ultimately, homeostatic instruments.

Feelings as the Mental Representatives of Homeostasis

To understand how cultural homeostasis operates, António Damásio introduces a central principle: feelings are the mental representatives and spokespersons of homeostasis within the conscious mind. Feelings are not mere epiphenomena, secondary effects, or ornaments of mental life. Instead, they are fundamental biological signals and mental images that inform us in real time about the state of our vital regulation.

When we experience well-being or pleasure, the organism indicates—through a coordinated internal chemistry—that we are in a favorable homeostatic state of efficiency and health. Conversely, when we feel pain, sadness, or distress, the brain warns us that something threatens our equilibrium and survival. This simple evolutionary logic—seeking what expands life and avoiding what damages it—has guided the evolution of living organisms for billions of years.

What makes human beings unique is that we have learned to externalize and expand this regulation through cultural homeostasis. We do not merely react biologically to fear, grief, or awe; we construct rituals to conjure them. We create elegies, funerary sculptures, philosophies, justice systems, and cosmologies to respond collectively to those biological alarms.

Art, science, and culture, from this neurobiological perspective, are authentic homeostatic technologies. They are refined tools developed by our minds to regulate our own affective states, process loss, celebrate social cohesion, and, ultimately, pursue not just basic survival, but a state of flourishing well-being.

The neurobiological evidence: the brain that narrates and feels

Research by Damásio and his team at the Brain and Creativity Institute of the University of Southern California has provided fascinating empirical evidence of this fundamental human capacity. In recent experiments, it has been shown that the human brain possesses a narrative neuronal architecture —sets of brain structures, especially the Default Mode Network— that respond similarly to stories told in different languages.

This means that the capacity to construct narratives is not a cultural addition, but a fundamental characteristic of human brain architecture. Human beings do not just tell stories: they are made to tell stories, because stories are the vehicle through which we process our emotional experiences and regulate our homeostatic balance.

The work of art —a cave painting, a symphony, a novel, a poem— is nothing other than an externalisation of this internal narrative process. When the cave painter painted a bison in Altamira, he was not simply decorating a wall: he was projecting his inner world, his fears and hopes, his experiences of hunting and survival, onto a tangible image that allowed him to process and regulate his affective states.

Art as a homeostatic instrument

Perhaps the most powerful formulation of this theory is the following: art functions as an instrument of biological regulation. Just as drugs act on biochemical processes to restore physiological balance, artistic experiences act on neural and affective processes to restore psychological and social balance.

A paradigmatic example is music. Listening to a melancholic piece when we are sad is not a masochistic act: it is a form of homeostasis. Music allows us to feel our emotion from a safe distance, process it, shape it, and finally integrate it into our life experience. Cheerful music, on the other hand, does not just express joy: it induces it, regulating our affective state upward.

The same applies to the visual arts, literature, theatre, and dance. All of them are affective technologies that we have developed to modulate our homeostatic state, to process suffering and enhance well-being, to connect with others and build community ties.

The social dimension: art, empathy, and group cohesion

Damásio does not limit himself to considering individual homeostasis. Social homeostasis is equally fundamental. Human beings are deeply social animals, and our homeostatic balance depends on our inclusion in groups, our capacity for cooperation, and the quality of our affective bonds.

Art plays a crucial role in this social homeostasis. Community celebrations, shared rituals, collective narratives —myths, epics, traditions— are technologies of group cohesion that synchronise the affective states of members of a community, generating trust, cooperation, and a sense of belonging.

The neurologist has identified specific neural mechanisms underlying this social dimension. Oxytocin and vasopressin, neurotransmitters involved in social bonding and pair formation, are released during shared aesthetic experiences. Art literally connects us with others, modulating our neurochemistry to facilitate empathy and cooperation.

The critique of "Descartes' error" revisited

Damásio is famous for his critique of "Descartes' error": the radical separation between mind and body, reason and emotion. In his earlier work, Descartes' Error (1994), he argued that human rationality depends crucially on emotions. In The Strange Order of Things, he takes this critique one step further.

The "error" he now combats is the belief that culture —including art, philosophy, and science— is the exclusive product of disembodied reason. Damásio demonstrates that feelings and emotions are not obstacles to cultural creation, but its main engine. We do not create art despite our emotions, but because of them. Art is the highest expression of our biological need to regulate ourselves affectively.

This perspective has radical implications for the philosophy of art. If art is a homeostatic instrument, then its value resides not only in its formal beauty or its capacity to represent reality, but in its biological function: helping human beings survive, prosper, and find meaning in a chaotic and uncertain world.

Connection with research on the origin of art (S/Y/C)

This theory of Damásio resonates deeply with the research we have been developing on the S/Y/C model of neuronal functioning and the Law of Biological Coherence.

The S (Survival) dimension of our model finds its biological foundation in Damásian homeostasis: every aesthetic experience, however elevated it may seem, is rooted in mechanisms of vital regulation that ensure the persistence of the organism.

The Y (Symbolon) dimension —the capacity to create and share symbols as an act of recognition— corresponds to the human capacity to externalise homeostatic states into objects, images, and narratives. Art does not only express emotions: it symbolises them, makes them communicable and shareable.

The C (Wholeness) dimension —the drive toward totality and coherence— finds its equivalent in the homeostatic pursuit of balance and flourishing. Beauty is not merely formal pleasure; it is the subjective experience of an achieved homeostatic state, of a successful integration of parts into a coherent whole.

Damásio thus offers a robust empirical and theoretical basis for our hypothesis: art is not a cultural luxury, but an expression of the single function of the nervous system, which needs to survive (S), symbolise (Y), and achieve wholeness (C) to maintain its biological coherence.

Final considerations: art as testimony of the living

Damásio's theory invites us to abandon the old dichotomy between nature and culture. Art is neither purely biological nor purely cultural: it is the crossroads where both domains meet and enhance each other.

Art, like medicine, philosophy, or science, is a homeostatic response to the challenges of human existence. It is born from pain and seeks relief; born from loss and seeks transcendence; born from solitude and seeks connection; born from chaos and seeks form.

Understanding this does not diminish the mystery of art, but deepens it. Because if art is an instrument of homeostatic regulation, then creating and contemplating art is not an escape from life, but the most human way of living it. It is the way we have found, after millions of years of evolution, to feel at home in a universe that was not made for us.

References (APA7)

Damasio, A. (2018). The strange order of things: Life, feeling, and the making of cultures. Vintage. (Original work published 2017)

Damasio, A., & Damasio, H. (2016). Making minds and cultures: The neurobiology of storytelling and art. In The Strange Order of Things (pp. 293-318). Pantheon Books.

López Mallo, J. B. (2023). La construcción neuro-simbólica. Una aproximación al funcionamiento del cerebro desde una perspectiva multidisciplinar [Doctoral thesis, University of the Basque Country - Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea]. ADDI Repository. http://hdl.handle.net/10810/62701

https://catalogo.sanchoelsabio.eu

López Mallo, J. B. (2026a). De la filosofía quirúrgica a la ley de coherencia biológica S/Y/C: Hacia una investigación sobre el origen del arte en la especie Homo. Lopez Mallo, Javier Bernabé. https://isbn.bibna.gub.uy/catalogo.php?mode=detalle&nt=57196

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GYGTJD5C

López Mallo, J. B. (2026b). From surgical philosophy to the law of biological coherence S/Y/C: Toward a study of the origin of art in the Homo lineage. Lopez Mallo, Javier Bernabé. https://isbn.bibna.gub.uy/catalogo.php?mode=detalle&nt=57197

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GY89SZS1

Autor / Author

Bernabé Mallo
Doctor en Filosofía – Universidad del País Vasco / Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (UPV/EHU)
Investigador independiente en neurofilosofía, evolución humana y origen del arte.

Bernabé Mallo
PhD in Philosophy – University of the Basque Country / Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea (UPV/EHU)
Independent researcher in neurophilosophy, human evolution, and the origin of art.

viernes, 7 de agosto de 2026

The Human Journey: From the Makapansgat Pebble to the Far Reaches of the Cosmos

Bernabé Mallo

A reflection on the origin of art and the continuity of the species through the lens of Clottes, Menninghaus, and Henshilwood

Introduction: a simple and complex question

The enigma of Makapansgat: the first symbolic gesture

Cave art: why hide beauty?

The restless traveller: from Altamira to outer space

Towards a synthesis: art as testimony to human continuity

Final considerations: the species that never stops travelling

References

Enlaces / Links

viernes, 24 de julio de 2026

Bones That Speak: The World's Oldest Bone Tool Industry and the Origin of Modern Behavior

Bernabé Mallo

A review of the discovery by Henshilwood and colleagues (2001): An early bone tool industry from the Middle Stone Age at Blombos Cave, South Africa: implications for the origins of modern human behaviour, symbolism and language

Introduction: when bone becomes technology

The Blombos discovery: 28 tools that rewrite history

The context: more than tools, symbolic behavior

Why are these tools important?

1. They dismantle the myth of the European "symbolic explosion"

2. They evidence the presence of syntactic language

3. They demonstrate a cultural tradition

4. They broaden our understanding of the origin of art and technology

Connection with research on the origin of art (S/Y/C)

Implications for future research

Final considerations: bone as testimony to the modern mind

References

Enlaces / Links

domingo, 19 de julio de 2026

The World's Oldest Art: When Symbolism Was Born in Africa

Bernabé Mallo

A review of the discovery by Henshilwood and colleagues (2002): Emergence of modern human behavior: Middle Stone Age engravings from South Africa

Introduction: the enigma of the modern mind

The Blombos discovery: two engraved ochre pieces

Dating: 77,000 years of antiquity

Why are these engravings important?

1. They dismantle the "Big Bang" myth

2. They evidence the presence of syntactic language

3. They demonstrate a cultural tradition

4. They broaden our understanding of the origin of art

Connection with research on the origin of art (S/Y/C)

Implications for future research

Final considerations: the echo of an ancient mind

References

Enlaces / Links

martes, 2 de junio de 2026

The Mistake of Thinking That Art Is a Luxury: António Damásio's Biological Theory of Art.

Bernabé Mallo

A review of The Strange Order of Things (2017) and its implications for understanding

the origin of Art

Introduction: Why do we create art?

What is homeostasis and why is it key to understanding art?

Feelings as the Mental Representatives of Homeostasis

The neurobiological evidence: the brain that narrates and feels

Art as a homeostatic instrument

The social dimension: art, empathy, and group cohesion

The critique of "Descartes' error" revisited

Connection with research on the origin of art (S/Y/C)

Final considerations: art as testimony of the living

References (APA7)

Autor / Author

Enlaces / Links

Vistas de página la semana pasada