- the subject of study of both the natural sciences (natural sciences) and the spiritual sciences (humanitarian and social knowledge). Between natural and humanities There is a continuous dialogue on the human problem, exchange of information, theoretical models, methods, etc.

Currently, science has established the idea that - a biosocial being that combines biological and social components. It should also be taken into account that not only humans have a social form of existence, but also many animals.

From point of view modern science to more accurately separate the biological predetermination of human existence and his (actually human) essence. The science called sociobiology. This science in the study of man is at the intersection of natural science and humanities.

Thus, it can definitely be argued that the problem of man is interdisciplinary in nature, and the modern natural scientific view of man is complex knowledge obtained within the framework of various disciplines. A holistic view of man, his essence and nature is also impossible without the use of data from humanitarian and social knowledge and philosophy.

The emergence of scientific anthropology. The theory of human origins from anthropoid apes

Anthropology- the science of human origin and evolution. Anthropogenesis— the evolutionary process of human formation. The main questions of anthropology are questions about the place and time of the appearance of man, the main stages of his evolution, driving forces and factors, the relationship between anthropogenesis and sociogenesis.

Initial submission about the origin of man and society already reflected in ancient mythologies. Later, various versions of the religious view of human origins appeared.

For example, in Christianity it is believed that the first man Adam was created by God from dust, and the first woman Eve was created from Adam’s rib. Regardless of the specific version, the essence of the religious answer to the question of the origin of man remains the same: man is the creation of God, and the specific questions that accompany and constitute the creative, divine act are a mystery.

However, already in ancient philosophy the idea of ​​the natural origin of man appears. But ancient ideas about the origin of man were speculative and sometimes simply fantastic, being not so much the result of a generalization of objective data as the product of the sophisticated imagination of ancient philosophers.

Anthropology developed rapidly in the second half of the 19th century. after creation by Charles Darwin theories of evolution.

The German biologist Haeckel hypothesized the existence in the past of a species intermediate between apes and humans, which he called Pithecanthropus(ape-man). He also suggested that the ancestors of humans were not modern monkeys, but Dryopithecus(ancient monkeys). From them, one line of evolution went to chimpanzees and gorillas, the other to humans. Twenty million years ago, under the influence of cold weather, the jungle retreated, and one of the branches of Dryopithecus had to leave the trees and switch to upright walking. Their remains were found in India.

In 1960, the English archaeologist L. Leakey found “homo habilis” in East Africa, whose age is 2 million years. The brain volume was 670 cm3. In the same layers, tools were found made from split river pebbles, sharpened with several chips. Later, the remains of creatures of the same type, 5.5 million years old, were discovered in Kenya.

After this, the opinion became stronger that it was in East Africa in the Quaternary period of the Cenozoic era that the separation of man and ape took place. It was then that the evolutionary lines of humans and chimpanzees diverged.

Modern molecular biology data allow us to establish that humans and modern chimpanzees have 91% similar genes, humans and gibbons have 76%, and humans and macaques have 66%. In genetic terms, the chimpanzee is considered the closest living ape to humans. However, a study of morphological characteristics indicates that the greatest similarity between humans and gorilla is 385. Next comes chimpanzee - 369, orangutan - 359 and gibbon - 117.

Apes are more similar to humans than to lower apes, however, since the lower and higher apes had common ancestors, similarities are still found between them, whereas when comparing lower apes to humans, there is no similarity.

What was the reason for the appearance of a person in a particular place? In East Africa, uranium outcrops have been noted and increased radiation has been recorded, which, as genetically proven, causes mutations. Thus, here evolutionary changes could occur at a faster pace.

The emerging species, physically weaker than those around it, had to, in order to survive, begin to make tools and lead a social way of life. All this contributed to the emergence of the mind - a powerful tool for a naturally weak creature that did not have sufficient natural defense organs.

“Homo habilis” (“southern ape”) is classified as an australopithecus, the remains of which were first found in Africa in 1924. The brain volume of the australopithecus did not exceed the brain volume of apes, but, apparently, this was enough to create tools.

In 1891, the remains of Pithecanthropus, predicted by Haeckel, were discovered on the island of Java. Creatures that lived 0.5 million years ago had a height of more than 150 cm, a brain volume of approximately 900 cm 3. They already used knives, drills, and hand axes.

In the 1920s it was found in China Sinanthropus(“Chinese man”) with a brain volume close to that of Pithecanthropus. He used fire and vessels, but did not yet have speech.

In 1856, the remains of a creature that lived 150-40 thousand years ago were discovered in Germany, called Neanderthal. He had a brain volume comparable to that of modern man, sloping forehead, brow ridges, low cranium. The Neanderthal lived in caves and hunted mammoths. Neanderthals buried their dead relatives, which was noted for the first time.

Finally, in the Cro-Magnon cave in France in 1868, the remains of a creature (named Cro-Magnon) were found, similar in appearance and skull volume (up to 1600 cm ") to a modern man with a height of 180 cm. His age was determined - from 40 to 15 thousand years This is - a reasonable person. During the same era, racial differences emerged. Isolated groups developed special characteristics - light skin in whites, etc.

So, the line of human evolution is built as follows: “homo habilis” (Australopithecus), “homo erectus” (Pithecanthropus and Sinanthropus), “Neanderthal man”, “homo sapiens” (Cro-Magnon).

After Cro-Magnon man did not change genetically, while his social evolution continued.

Anthropologists of the early 21st century. claim that modern humans arose more than 100 thousand years ago in East Africa. This hypothesis was called "Noah's Ark" because, according to the Bible, all races and peoples descended from the three sons of Noah - Shem, Ham and Jophet.

According to this version, Pithecanthropus, Sinanthropus and Neanderthal are not the ancestors of modern humans, but different groups of hominids (humanoid creatures) displaced by “Homo erectus” from East Africa. Genetic studies support this hypothesis, but they are considered unreliable by some anthropologists and paleontologists.

An alternative view of multiregional human evolution argues that only archaic humans arose in East Africa, while modern humans arose where they live now. Man left Africa at least 1 million years ago. This hypothesis is based on the pathological similarities between modern humans and distant ancestors who lived in the same places.

It is not yet possible to say which of these hypotheses is correct, since the fossil record is incomplete, and intermediate species are still not fully known. It is impossible to detect the point at which biogenesis gave way to anthropogenesis, for a long time biological and social factors acted in parallel. Despite numerous archaeological and paleontological data, the picture of anthropogenesis remains still incomplete; many intermediate links between humans and ancient apes remain unknown. Difficulties also arise because the process of anthropogenesis was not linear.

The evolution of not only humans, but all living things, is carried out through the gradual emergence of lateral branches, many of which disappear almost immediately, others lead to the side, and only one line ultimately leads to the emergence of Homo sapiens. Graphically, hominid evolution can be represented as a tree with many branches, some of them long dead, others still alive.

Undoubtedly, scientific ideas about anthropogenesis will not only be replenished, but, possibly, will change significantly.

The hypothesis of the origin of people from proto-man (Homo pre-Sapiens)

Ten unanswered questions

The theory of the origin of people from apes in natural science in general counts installed. However, for example, the prudent Charles Darwin did not use the phrase “man descended from apes.” In his book "The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection"(1859) this formulation does not exist. Even after 12 years in special work "The Descent of Man and Sexual Selection"“He writes only about evolution in general, without touching on the “intermediate link” at all.

Darwinists declared the origin of man from apes in 1863 Focht, Huxley And Haeckel. It was Haeckel who spoke about " missing link"between higher primates and humans, referring to the described Linnaeus“troglodytic man,” called by Haeckel “an ape-man deprived of speech.”

At the same time, this approach to the history of the emergence of man has raised and continues to raise many questions that remain unanswered to this day. The entire musculoskeletal system of a person, his overly large and inflexible legs, and weak arms are clearly not suitable for fast climbing and jumping through trees.

Two foot prints in fossilized volcanic ash (Tanzania), dating back to 3.5 million years ago, prove that the straightened bipedal walking predates labor by millions of years. Labor led to the improvement of upright walking, but upright walking is a prerequisite for freeing the forelimbs for labor. Why did the monkey ancestors, having descended from the trees, choose such a strange method of movement, although the four-legged movement is easier, faster and is used by all modern monkeys?

Why did the forelimbs of people become so shortened and weakened, although strong arms give clear advantages in hunting and work, especially with primitive tools?

Why didn’t living chimpanzees or extinct australopithecines go to work, although they were millions of years old? semi erect, ate meat and often used sticks and bones? Consequently, it was not labor that created man (as Engels believed), but labor and speech.

If human ancestors were hunters (the famous painting “The Hunt of Ancient “People” for a Mammoth”) and ate meat, then why did they jaws and teeth were weak for raw meat, and the intestines relative to the body were almost twice as long as those of carnivores? Moreover, the jaws were reduced in the earliest erect walking animals (prezinjanthropes), although they did not know fire and could not soften food on it. What then did human ancestors eat?

Why did a person's body hair disappear? Although the nights in South-East Africa are very cool and all the monkeys living there retain their fur.

Like animals, the ancestors of people, with slow movement and the absence of tools, except pathetic sticks and stones, escaped from predators?

Why do intelligent people kill each other en masse (wars)?

Why did man spread all over the Earth?

So many secrets in the reconstruction of the original form of man indicate that in There is some major gap in the modern theory of anthropogenesis.

All of the above and many other questions about the origins of man were given convincing answers by the hypothesis put forward in the 1970s by the Soviet researcher, Professor B.F. Porshnev.

Who are we?

Thirty-five million years ago, a group separated from ancient insectivorous mammals primary animals(Fig. 1), from which between ten and seven million years ago it was formed ancestral trunk of African apes(gibbon, gorilla).

Between seven and six million years ago, the ancestral trunk common to African apes split into two parts: the hominoid lineage (troglodytid family) and the pongid lineage (higher ancient anthropoid apes: bonobos, chimpanzees).

Upright, bipedal, two-armed, but dumb troglodytids were not yet people, but they were no longer monkeys.

If we unbiasedly ask the question about the distinctive features of man, given by the experience of history, and which cannot be extended to animals, then there are only two such features.

• Humans are the only species within which large-scale, rationally inexplicable, mutual killing is systematically practiced.
• Humans are the only species capable of absurdity, and logic and syntax, practical and theoretical thinking are its deabsurdization.

The animal’s body behaves in any, even artificially created, situation from a physiological point of view absolutely correctly - it gives a picture of a nervous breakdown, to construct the absurdity of it nervous system not capable.

Rice. 1. Variant of the diagram of the process of anthropogenesis: A - hominid line; B - hominoid line; B - pongid line; G - ancestral trunk of African monkeys; 1 - fossil gibbon; 2 - ancient gorilla

In the troglodytid family, three genera are clearly distinguished: Australopithecus, Archaeoanthropus and Paleoanthropus (see Fig. 1). The lowest form, australopithecines, is very similar to anthropic monkeys in terms of the volume and structure of the brain, and the morphology of the head, but radically differs from them in upright posture.

The highest form of upright paleoanthropes is extremely similar to humans in the structure of the body, skull, and brain.

Troglodytids, starting with Australopithecines and ending with paleoanthropids, only knew how to find and master the bones and corpses of animals that died and were killed by predators. But this was also a very difficult task for them. Neither teeth nor nails, nor the muscles of mastication and the digestive apparatus, were adapted to such a “labor occupation.” Only a skill that went back to the instinct of breaking nuts, shellfish, and reptiles with stones, which is manifested throughout the phylogeny of monkeys, helped them master the bone and brain and pierce the thick skin. This was a purely biological adaptation to a fundamentally new way of feeding - necrophagy.

Troglodytids not only did not kill large animals, but also had a strong instinct not to kill under any circumstances, otherwise their fragile biological niche in the biocenosis would have been destroyed.

The upright walking great apes-breakers must have also turned out to be porters, since they had to either carry stones to the location of the meat food, or carry the food to the stones. Therefore, troglodytids were upright: the upper limbs had to be freed from the function of swinging (in the trees) to perform the function of carrying. So "tools" in the Lower and Middle Paleolithic were means of cutting up the remains of large animals and absolutely nothing more. There are three large stages in this process.

First stage- at the level of australopithecines. The time of the richest fauna of killer predators. And Australopithecines, apparently, did not even use the abundant reserves of meat left by powerful predators, but only bone and brain marrow, which only required dismembering and breaking bones. To do this, it was enough to use ordinary stones, which is why fossil australopithecines did not leave “tools of their labor”; they did not yet need this skill.

The bone marrow of herbivores makes up about 5% of their mass, so the same deceased ancient elephant had 200-300 kg of this highly nutritious substance, plus the brain weighed the same. There were practically no contenders for this protein-rich food, with the exception of rodents and insects.

In the second stage A deep crisis of the predatory fauna emerged, marked by the complete extinction of killer predators. Consequently, Australopithecines were also doomed to extinction. Only one branch of trigloditids survived the crisis and gave a completely updated picture of ecology and morphology - the archaeoanthropes. The role of collectors and accumulators of relatively fresh corpses was played by widely branched rivers. All reliably localized Lower Paleolithic sites are located near river bends, ancient shallows and rifts, etc. - natural traps for carcasses floating and dragging along the bottom. The task of the archaeoanthropes was to pierce their skins and cut the ligaments with stones in the form of axes (Fig. 2).

Rice. 2. “Tools of labor” of archaeoanthropes

Thus, at this stage, eating not only brains, but also meat developed, probably in competition with feathered predators, vultures.

Third stage characterized by the onset of a crisis due to the growth of the fauna of the so-called cave predators (cave lions, bears). Rivers began to account for a small part of the total mass of dying herbivores. The genus of archaeoanthropes was thereby doomed to extinction. And again, only one branch emerged from the crisis morphologically and ecologically renewed - the paleoanthropes (troglodytes). Their sources of meat food can no longer be described unambiguously. Their stones are increasingly suitable for cutting and butchering the meat of animals and fish damaged by predators, although they are still attracted to the extraction of brains. This genus is already able to spread out in search of food, but they still did not hunt anyone.

However, this third stage also comes to an end along with the next zigzag of fluctuations of fauna and flora in the late Pleistocene.

In the Quaternary period of the Cenozoic era (Pleistocene), cooling occurred (Fig. 3), which led to glaciation of a large part of the Earth. Arrived glacial period with the spread of ice over a significant part of even the Southern Hemisphere. Many species of woody plants died. There was an intensive evolution of mammals with a change in fauna and extinction of species. New biogeocenoses forming at the end of the Middle Pleistocene replaced the upright carnivorous higher primates, despite all their sophisticated adaptability

Rice. 3. Pleistocene landscape

For these amazing animals, which developed so quickly and are now doomed to extinction, nature left only a very narrow exit. It consisted in violating the very, previously saving, principle of “thou shalt not kill,” which constituted the deepest basis, the hidden secret of their existence in various forms of symbiosis with animals. The first condition for their unhindered access to the remains of dead meat was that the living and even dying animals should not be afraid of them.

The solution to the biological paradox was that instinct did not forbid them to kill members of their own species, i.e. it was possible to use part of its population (eating fellow animals) as a self-reproducing source of food.

All signs of cannibalism among troglodytes that are known to anthropology directly indicate the posthumous consumption of the cranial and bone marrow, probably the entire corpse of creatures similar to themselves. This trend still could not solve the food problem: a species that feeds on itself has no prospects. Therefore, a completely new phenomenon arose - the embryonic splitting of the species itself on the basis of specialization of a special passive, eaten part of the population, which, however, then very actively buds off into a special species, in order to ultimately become a special family.

Thus, a new species split off from the previous species relatively quickly and violently, becoming its ecological opposite.

If paleoanthropes (troglodytes) did not kill anyone except their own kind, then these others (new species Homopre- Sapiens - emerging humans (see Fig. 1) represented an inversion: as they turned into hunters, they did not kill precisely paleoanthropes. At first they differed from other troglodytes only in that they did not kill these other troglodytes. However, much later, having separated from the troglodytes, they not only killed the latter, like any other animals, as “non-humans,” but also killed their own kind, i.e. others Homo pre- Sapiens.

There is no need to talk about the opening of fire at all - it appeared (when the stones hit) against the will and consciousness of the troglodytes and caused them great inconvenience (smoldering of the litter of the troglodytes' lair). They were required to make a “discovery” of a different kind: how to prevent fire from occurring at all.

During the fight against fire, its useful properties were also discovered: from fireplaces, fire in a coal pit, to a pit - a stove and a lamp.

In addition, the use of fire contributed to the loss of hair by troglodytids, this mysterious phenomenon. This method of thermoregulation is almost unique among mammals. However, the combination of such environmental factors, like collecting bones in the midday heat (during the rest of real predators) and exposure to the heat of fire pits (coal pits), and led to this method of heat exchange, effective only in conditions of sunshine and constant contact with the heat of fire. The hair on the head was preserved, probably as protection from the effects sun rays in the midday heat (see above).

Where are we going?

It's time to discard all the nonsense that litters the problem of the formation of Homo sapiens. It is a scientific inconsistency to think that all individuals of an ancestral species turned into humans. It is even more senseless to think that they stopped being born since some became human through evolution.

As for the person ( Homo sapiens), then it appeared (see Fig. 1) only 35-40 thousand years ago. Human history is a blast! The impetus for the explosion was the rapid divergence of two types - Trog- lodites And Homo pre- Sapiens, rapidly moving away from each other to different levels of organization of matter - biological and social. Only extremely tense ecological relationships between both diverging species can explain such an unusual speed of budding of a new, progressive species. Consequently, we have before us the product of the action of some special mechanism of selection, the opposite of Darwinian, “natural”.

The “mystery of man” is fully included in the inexhaustibly complex topic of the divergence of paleoanthropes and Homo pre- Sapiens. Translated into chronology, the length of this interval is only 15-25 thousand years, and this is where the whole mystery of divergence that gave birth to people fits.

Having made a pathological transition to predatory behavior in relation to his own species, the paleoanthropist - the aggressor - introduced fear of “his neighbor” into the hominid world. Fixed genetically, this fear has become innate (and now a 5-7 month old child experiences fear when a stranger approaches).

Only a very few, selected by paleoanthropes (troglodytes) for their “big foreheads,” could survive and become one of those adults whose descendants later split off from the paleoanthropes, forming isolated populations of tributaries of these paleoanthropes. However, in the end they were still destroyed, but this was already done Homo pre- Sapiens. This aromorphosis was a fairly local phenomenon: according to modern genetic studies of human hemoglobin, it turned out that all of humanity is the descendants of only 600-1000 ancestral male individuals.

There is one more very specific fact: the settlement of early Homo Sapiens throughout almost the entire habitable territory of the Earth, including America, Australia, and Oceania. They didn’t feel “crowded” in the economic sense; they undoubtedly felt cramped in the sense of the difficulty of existing with their own kind. They also fled from the neighborhood with those populations Homo pre- Sapiens, who themselves did not fight against these factors, but shifted their burdens onto part of their own and surrounding populations.

Finally, the globe ceased to be open to free movement, and its surface was covered with a system of mutually isolated cells, using their own language (the help of misunderstanding) as a means of protection from alien behavior and aggressive aspirations. And yet this mutual avoidance was too late a means to thus protect against interbreeding with troglodytes - adelphophages(fratricides). Consequently, Homo sapiens failed to “leave honestly” from the animal world, “without getting dirty.”

Exactly species heterogeneity makes the life of humanity (part of which are infiltrated troglodytes) so unstable and fraught with the most dire consequences.

Predatory hominoids today - the so-called " the mighty of the world this." And their unreasonable rule brought all life on Earth to the brink of death. However, the path to salvation is in the hands of Man himself.

Currently there are many theories of human origins on our planet. The question of the emergence of intelligent life on Earth has always attracted the attention of scientists in various fields. This lecture will discuss the main versions of human origins, although none of them has a 100% guarantee of its veracity. Archaeological scientists together with astrologers from different countries explored a wide variety of sources of the origin of life (morphological, biological, chemical). But all these efforts, unfortunately, did not help to find out in which century BC. the first people appeared.

Darwin's theory

The most probable and closest to the truth version of the origin of man is the theory of Charles Darwin (British scientist). It was this scientist who managed to make a huge contribution to biological science. Darwin's theory is based on the definition of natural selection. In his opinion, natural selection plays a big role in evolution. The foundation of Darwin's theory was created from numerous observations of nature while traveling around the world. The project began in 1837 and lasted for more than 20 years. Another scientist A. Wallace supported Darwin in the late 19th century. At his report in London, he stated that it was Charles who inspired him, after which a movement appeared that was called “Darwinism.”

All followers of this movement argue that each representative of flora and fauna is changeable and comes from pre-existing species. It turns out that Darwin's theory is based on the inconstancy of living things in nature, and the reason for this process is natural selection. It turns out that only the strongest forms survive on the planet, capable of quickly adapting to environment. Man is one of these creatures. Evolution and the desire to survive have contributed to the development of a variety of skills and abilities.

Evolutionary theory

According to followers of this theory, the appearance of people on Earth is associated with the modification of primates. Nowadays, evolutionary theory is one of the most discussed and widespread. Its essence lies in the fact that people are descendants of certain species of monkeys. As for evolution itself, it began from time immemorial under the influence of natural selection and other external factors. This version of the origin of man is confirmed by many testimonies and evidence (psychological, paleontological, archaeological). On the other hand, the ambiguity of many facts does not give the right to consider it 100% correct.

Rice. 1 - Evolutionary theory of human origin

Space anomalies

This theory is the most fantastic and controversial. Her followers are sure that man appeared on planet Earth by accident. Its essence lies in the fact that man is the product of parallel anomalous spaces. Forefathers modern people there were representatives of other civilizations, representing a combination of energy, aura and matter. The theory assumes that in the Universe there are a huge number of planets with the same biospheres as the Earth, which were created by an information substance. If the conditions for this were favorable, then they contributed to the emergence of life.

This branch is called “creationism”. All his followers deny the main theories of the emergence of man. They are sure that all people were created by God, who represents the highest link. At the same time, he created man in his own image.

Rice. 2 - Theory of Creation

If we consider biblical theory of the origin of man on Earth, then the first people are Adam and Eve. For example, in countries like Egypt, religion goes deep into ancient myths. A large number of skeptics consider this version impossible. This version is not supported by any evidence, it simply is.

The basis of this version is the activities of foreign civilizations. In other words, people are the descendants of alien creatures that arrived on our planet millions of years ago. There are several endings to this version of the origins of humanity. One of them is to interbreed the progenitors with aliens. In other outcomes, genetic engineering of a higher intelligence is to blame, which created a thinking person from its own DNA. The version about the intervention of aliens in evolutionary development of people. Archaeologists still find various evidence (records, drawings) that supernatural forces helped ancient people.

Rice. 3 - Intervention Theory

Stages of evolution

Whatever the history of human origin, most scientists agree on the identity of the stages of development. Australopithecines are considered the first prototypes of humans. They communicated with each other using their hands, and their height did not exceed 130 cm.

In the next stage of evolution, Pithecanthropus appears, which has already learned to use fire and use the gifts of nature for its own needs (bones, skins, stones). The next stage of evolution is paleoanthropus. Such prototypes of people already knew how to think collectively and communicate using sounds.

Before the appearance of a thinking person, neoanthropes are considered the last stage in evolution. Visually, they were very similar to modern people, they created tools, chose leaders, united in tribes, etc.

Homeland of people

While there is debate as to which theory of the origin of man is correct, it has been possible to establish where exactly the mind originated. We are talking about the African continent. A large number of archaeologists believe that the location can be safely narrowed to the northeastern part of the mainland. Although, there are scientists who suggest that humanity began its development from Asia, namely from India and other neighboring countries.

The fact that the first people lived specifically in Africa is confirmed by numerous finds in large-scale excavations. It can also be noted that at that time there were several types of human prototypes.

Today, there are different versions of the origin of man on Earth. This and scientific theories, both alternative and apocalyptic. Many people believe themselves to be descendants of angels or divine powers, contrary to convincing evidence from scientists and archaeologists. Authoritative historians reject this theory as mythology, preferring other versions.

For a long time, man has been the subject of study of the sciences of spirit and nature. There is still a dialogue and exchange of information between sociology and natural science about the problem of being.

At the moment, scientists have given a specific definition to man. This is a biosocial creature that combines intelligence and instincts.

Modern science clearly separates biology and the essence of man. Leading researchers are searching for the boundary between these components. research institutes Worldwide. This field of science is called sociobiology. She looks deeply into the essence of a person, revealing his natural and humanitarian characteristics and preferences. A holistic view of society is impossible without drawing on the data of its social philosophy. Today, man is a creature that is interdisciplinary in nature. However, many people around the world are concerned about another question - its origin. Scientists and religious scholars on the planet have been trying to answer this question for thousands of years. -

The question of the emergence of intelligent life beyond the Earth attracts the attention of leading scientists in various specialties. Some people agree that the origins of man and society are not worthy of study. Basically, this is the opinion of those who sincerely believe in supernatural forces. Based on this view of the origin of man, the individual was created by God. This version has been refuted by scientists for decades in a row.

Regardless of which category of citizens each person considers himself to be, in any case, this question will always excite and intrigue. Recently, modern philosophers have begun to ask themselves and those around them: “Why were people created, and what is their purpose for being on Earth?” The answer to the second question will never be found. As for the appearance of an intelligent creature on the planet, it is quite possible to study this process.

Today, the main theories of human origins are trying to answer this question, but none of them can provide a 100 percent guarantee of the correctness of their judgments. Currently, archaeological scientists and astrologers around the world are exploring various sources of the origin of life on the planet, be they chemical, biological or morphological. Unfortunately, at the moment, humanity has not even been able to determine in which century BC the first people appeared.

Darwin's theory. Currently, there are different versions of the origin of man. However, the most probable and closest to the truth is the theory of a British scientist named Charles Darwin. It was he who made an invaluable contribution to biological science. His theory is based on the definition of natural selection, which plays the role of the driving force of evolution. This is a natural scientific version of the origin of man and all life on the planet. The foundation of Darwin's theory was formed by his observations of nature while traveling around the world. Development of the project began in 1837 and lasted more than 20 years.

At the end of the 19th century, the Englishman was supported by another natural scientist, A. Wallace.Soon after his report in London, he admitted that it was Charles who inspired him. This is how a whole direction appeared - Darwinism. Followers of this movement agree that all types of fauna and flora on Earth are changeable and come from other, pre-existing species. Thus, the theory is based on the impermanence of all living things in nature. The reason for this is natural selection. Only the strongest forms survive on the planet, those that are able to adapt to current environmental conditions. Man is just such a creature. Thanks to evolution and the desire to survive, people began to develop their skills and knowledge.

Intervention theory. This version of human origins is based on the activities of foreign civilizations. It is believed that people are descendants of alien creatures that landed on Earth millions of years ago. This story of human origins has several endings.

According to some, people appeared as a result of crossing aliens with their ancestors. Others believe that genetic engineering of higher forms of intelligence, which bred homo sapiens from the flask and their own DNA, is to blame.

Some people are sure that humans arose as a result of an error in animal experiments.

On the other hand, a very interesting and probable version is about alien intervention in the evolutionary development of homo sapiens. It is no secret that archaeologists still find in various parts of the planet numerous drawings, records and other evidence that ancient people were helped by some kind of supernatural forces. This also applies to the Mayan Indians, who were allegedly enlightened by extraterrestrial creatures with wings on strange celestial chariots. There is also a theory that the entire life of humanity from origin to the peak of evolution proceeds according to a long-prescribed program laid down by an alien intelligence. There are also alternative versions about the relocation of earthlings from planets of such systems and constellations as Sirius, Scorpio, Libra, etc.

Evolutionary theory Followers of this version believe that the appearance of humans on Earth is associated with the modification of primates. This theory is by far the most widespread and discussed. Based on it, humans descended from certain species of monkeys. Evolution began in time immemorial under the influence of natural selection and other external factors. The theory of evolution indeed has a number of interesting proofs and evidence, both archaeological, paleontological, genetic and psychological. On the other hand, each of these statements can be interpreted differently. The ambiguity of the facts is what does not make this version 100% correct.

Theory of creation This branch was named creationism. His followers deny all major theories of human origins. It is believed that people were created by God, who is the highest level in the world. Man was created in his image from non-biological material. The biblical version of the theory states that the first people were Adam and Eve. God created them from clay. In Egypt and many other countries, religion goes deep into ancient myths. The vast majority of skeptics consider this theory impossible, estimating its probability at billionths of a percent. The version of the creation of all living things by God does not require proof, it simply exists and has the right to do so. In support of this, we can cite similar examples from legends and myths of peoples from different parts of the Earth. These parallels cannot be ignored.

Theory of space anomalies This is one of the most controversial and fantastic versions of anthropogenesis. Followers of the theory consider the appearance of man on Earth to be an accident. In their opinion, people became the fruit of an anomaly of parallel spaces. The forefathers of earthlings were representatives of the humanoid civilization, which are a mixture of Matter, Aura and Energy. The anomaly theory suggests that there are millions of planets in the Universe with similar biospheres that were created by a single information substance. Under favorable conditions, this leads to the emergence of life, that is, the humanoid mind. Otherwise, this theory is in many ways similar to the evolutionary one, with the exception of the statement about a certain program for the development of mankind.

Aquatic theory This version of the origin of man on Earth is almost 100 years old. In the 1920s, the aquatic theory was first proposed by a famous marine biologist named Alistair Hardy, who was later supported by another respected scientist, the German Max Westenhoffer. The version is based on the dominant factor that forced the great apes to reach a new stage of development. This is what forced the monkeys to exchange their aquatic lifestyle for land. This is how the hypothesis explains the lack of thick hair on the body. Thus, at the first stage of evolution, man moved from the hydropithecus stage, which appeared more than 12 million years ago, to homo erectus, and then sapiens. Today this version is practically not considered in science.

Alternative theories One of the most fairy tale versions the origin of man on the planet is that the descendants of people were certain chiropteran creatures. In some religions they are called angels. It was these creatures that inhabited the entire Earth from time immemorial. Their appearance was similar to a harpy (a mixture of a bird and a human). The existence of such creatures is supported by numerous cave paintings. There is another theory according to which people in the early stages of development were real giants. According to some legends, such a giant was half-man, half-god, since one of their parents was an angel. With time higher power stopped descending to Earth, and the giants disappeared

Ancient myths There are a huge number of legends and tales about the origin of man. IN Ancient Greece They believed that the ancestors of people were Deucalion and Pyrrha, who, by the will of the gods, survived the flood and created a new race from stone statues.

The ancient Chinese believed that the first man was formless and came out of a clay ball. The creator of people is the goddess Nuiva. She was a human and a dragon rolled into one.

According to Turkish legend, people came out of the Black Mountain. In her cave there was a hole that resembled the appearance of a human body. Jets of rain washed clay into it. When the form was filled and warmed by the sun, the first man came out of it. His name is Ai-Atam.

Myths about the origins of man from the Sioux Indians say that humans were created by the Rabbit Universe. The divine creature found a blood clot and began to play with it. Soon he began to roll on the ground and turned into guts. Then a heart and other organs appeared on the blood clot. As a result, the rabbit produced a full-fledged boy - the ancestor of the Sioux.

According to ancient Mexicans, God created the image of man from pottery clay. But due to the fact that he overcooked the workpiece in the oven, the man turned out burnt, that is, black. Subsequent attempts got better over and over again, and people came out whiter.

The Mongolian legend is one to one similar to the Turkish one. Man emerged from a clay mold. The only difference is that the hole was dug by God himself.

Stages of evolution Despite the versions of the origin of man, all scientists agree that the stages of his development were identical.

The first upright prototypes of humans were australopithecines, who communicated with each other using their hands and were no taller than 130 cm.

The next stage of evolution produced Pithecanthropus. These creatures already knew how to use fire and adapt nature to their own needs (stones, skin, bones).

The last stage of evolution before the appearance of Homo sapiens was the neoanthropes. Outwardly, they were practically no different from modern people. They made tools, united into tribes, elected leaders, organized voting and rituals.

The ancestral home of humanity Despite the fact that scientists and historians around the world are still arguing about theories of the origin of people, the exact place where the mind originated has still been established. This is the African continent.

Many archaeologists believe that it is possible to narrow the location to the northeastern part of the mainland, although there is an opinion that the southern half dominates in this matter.

On the other hand, there are people who are sure that humanity appeared in Asia (in India and adjacent countries).

Conclusions that the first people inhabited Africa were made after numerous finds as a result of large-scale excavations. It is noted that at that time there were several types of human prototypes (races).

The strangest archaeological finds Among the most interesting artifacts that can influence the idea of ​​what the origin and development of man actually was were the skulls of ancient people with horns.

Archaeological research was carried out in the Gobi Desert by a Belgian expedition in the mid-20th century. On the territory of the former Sumerian civilization, images of flying people and objects heading to Earth from beyond were repeatedly found. solar system.

Several other ancient tribes have similar drawings. In 1927, as a result of excavations in the Caribbean Sea, a strange transparent skull similar to a crystal one was found. Numerous studies have not revealed the technology and material of manufacture. Descendants of the Mayan tribe claim that their ancestors worshiped this skull as if it were a supreme deity.

It is believed that the first people lived in Africa. This is indicated by the fossils found and the results of genetic studies. However, scientists from China have a different point of view. They revised the theory of evolution, creating their own version. is figuring out whether their research deserves serious attention or is it just another example of marginal science.

Homo everywhere

There are two main hypotheses about the origin of modern man. The first - multiregional - was proposed in 1984. According to it, the immediate ancestor of man - the archanthropus, or Homo erectus - came from Africa and settled throughout Eurasia during the early and middle Pleistocene. Its individual populations gave rise to all modern races of sapiens: Caucasians, Negroids, Mongoloids and Australoids. In addition, supporters of the multiregional hypothesis believe that Neanderthals, erectus, and Denisovans belong to the same species - humans (Homo) - and are simply its separate forms. And the common ancestor of humans lived approximately 2.3-2.8 million years ago.

The main argument in favor of this hypothesis is the fossils of sapiens, archanthropes (the same erecti) and other ancient people. The remains found throughout Eurasia, according to supporters of this theory, indicate the regional continuity of certain human traits. In other words, modern man arose several times.

But there is a significant problem - multiregionalism contradicts scientific ideas about evolution. Yes, in evolutionary theory there is a concept of parallelism when different types Animals develop common features independently of each other. For example, the streamlined body shape and fins of sharks and dolphins. This makes the animals similar, but not close relatives. Or the eyes: in squids, mammals and insects they are so anatomically different that one cannot even assume the existence of some kind of common “ancestral” organ. However, with people it is different.

The multiregional hypothesis is mercilessly refuted by genetic data. Back in 1987, analysis of human mitochondrial DNA (it is inherited only from mothers) showed that we are all descendants of one woman who lived about 200 thousand years ago, the so-called Mitochondrial Eve (has nothing in common with her namesake from the Bible). Naturally, she lived among other people, but only her mitochondrial DNA was inherited by all living Homo sapiens, including Asians, Australians and Africans.

This finding is incompatible with multiregionalism. Humans had one ancestor, not several scattered around the planet. And 200 thousand years is much less than two million years. This, of course, does not answer the question of when sapiens arose: Mitochondrial Eve herself was a sapiens, like her parents. However, new information speaks in favor of the second main hypothesis of human origin - African.

Everyone was black

This hypothesis suggests that the first anatomically modern humans appeared in Africa. From here came different branches of sapiens, including pygmies and bushmen. According to Alexander Kozintsev, a researcher at the Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography, it was on this continent that a kind of mini-version of multiregionalism could be realized. Apparently, many different African groups formed here, and some of them gave rise to sapiens. Moreover, representatives of different branches came into contact, which ultimately led to the formation of modern humans as a single species.

Multiregionalism in its more global version is not capable of ensuring the genetic unity of all Homo sapiens. Otherwise, supporters of this archaic hypothesis would have to assume that populations of ancient people on different continents somehow interacted with each other. But there is no evidence of such intercontinental contacts in the Pleistocene.

Sapiens left Africa approximately 70-50 thousand years ago. As they spread throughout Eurasia, they displaced Neanderthals and Denisovan people, occasionally interbreeding with them. If modern humans descended from Neanderthals, as multiregionalists suggest, their mitochondrial DNA would have been little different from ours. However, as deciphering the genome of Homo neanderthalensis has shown, there is a deep genetic gap between us and them.

War on Darwinism

Nevertheless, attempts to rehabilitate this hypothesis continue. Thus, geneticist Shi Huang from Central South University in China and an ardent opponent of Darwinism decided to strike at genetic evidence. He published a preprint of the article in the bioRxiv repository.

A Chinese scientist has criticized the molecular clock method used to estimate the genetic distance between different species. The point is this. With the change of generations in DNA certain type neutral mutations accumulate at a constant rate, which do not affect its survival in any way (this matters, since harmful mutations are rejected, and useful ones occur quite rarely). Related species also accumulate mutations at the same rate. Therefore, species of the same genus differ more or less equally from each other, while species of different genera have more differences.

Thus, the molecular clock is not only a tool for identifying relationships between species. They can be used to roughly determine when one species separated from another. “Approximately” is the key word.

The fact is that, for all its usefulness, molecular clocks have a number of disadvantages. The main one is that mutation rates are not always constant. This is influenced by certain factors that can slow down or accelerate mutations. For example, new repeated DNA sequences may arise, representing “hot spots” of random changes. As a result, species that are close in evolutionary terms turn out to be more distant according to the molecular clock than species that are not so related. Thus, multiregionalists like to point out that there are more differences between the mtDNA of different chimpanzees than there are between the mtDNA of humans and Neanderthals. That is, the genetic gap separating us and H.neanderthalensis supposedly ceases to mean anything.

Shi Huang goes further and tries to prove that the generally accepted mechanism of evolution does not work. To explain why the molecular clock fails, he proposes a controversial and purely speculative theory, which he calls the maximum genetic diversity hypothesis. According to Shi Huang, mutations in genes are the driving force only for microevolution, that is, the occurrence of small changes at the intraspecific level. During macroevolution, when new groups of organisms are formed, epigenetic programs become more complex. The more complex they are, the more mutations can disrupt them, so genetic diversity should decrease. As a result, in complex organisms there is supposedly a limit on the number of neutral mutations. This, according to Huang, helps explain why sapiens and Neanderthals differ less than the chimpanzee species.

Upside down

Huang used his dubious theory to redefine human evolution. Thus, Africans turned out to be closer to each other than to other groups of the human population. This conclusion contradicts the African hypothesis, because if people originally lived in Africa, then nothing prevented their individual lines from accumulating a large number of mutations. In addition, the Chinese scientist established the approximate time of separation of the main Eurasian human populations - about two million years ago. A very immodest date compared to the age of Mitochondrial Eve, but it fits well into multiregionalism.

Huang also suggested that there were two migrations out of Africa: erectus with the ancestor of Neanderthals and Denisovan people. And he came to the conclusion that modern Africans are closer to the latter than non-Africans. He moved Mitochondrial Eve from Africa to East Asia.

Interestingly, these conclusions are based on the exclusion from genetic analysis of neutral mutations, which allegedly distort the true picture due to epigenetic programs. Huang created a new version of the molecular clock - a “slow” one, which takes into account changes only in conservative and difficult to change DNA sequences. By unjustifiably throwing out an entire piece of data, he literally turned everything upside down.

But the Chinese researcher did not take into account other possible explanations for the slowing of the molecular clock. Thus, evolutionists refer to the generation time effect. Humans live longer than monkeys, so mutations accumulate more slowly in humans.

You cannot compare the rate of mutations in humans and chimpanzees. Molecular clocks should be used at the local level, that is, to estimate the time of origin of closely related species. Within the framework of human evolution, the difference between Neanderthals and sapiens matters. On a larger scale, gross errors are possible. This once again reminds us of how important it is to know the limits of applicability of scientific instruments.

As for Shi Huang, his articles, including the one where he first proposed his hypothesis, have not been peer reviewed. Although proponents of multiregionalism support it, the Chinese geneticist has to confine himself to preprint repositories, where he can freely post his drafts without fear of serious criticism from experts in the field of anthropogenesis.

Where did life originate on Earth? What caused the emergence of our planet itself and even the entire solar system? These questions, which are almost impossible to find an answer to, have interested the whole world since time immemorial.

Scientists, religious leaders and ordinary people, century after century, talk about how man came into being, what was his purpose? What is this? God's intention or the tricks of nature, the natural process of evolution? Does Darwin's theory work?

Analyzing hypotheses of human origins is a very interesting thing. This is exactly what our article will discuss. Of course, it is not yet possible to give definitive answers to all questions in this regard, but who knows, maybe in the near future one of the most important secrets of this world will be revealed.

Main opinions

There are a huge number of hypotheses about the origin of man, and it is simply not possible to choose the only correct one from them. However, many years of systematization of knowledge and information obtained allow us to identify three main assumptions about the dawn of humanity and the appearance of people on Earth.

By and large, identifying these basic assumptions is not at all difficult. The most common opinion at the moment is the assertion of the natural origin of man as a result of the process of evolution. It is this theory that can be called the most rationally justified, which is what allowed it to gain such a large number of adherents.

The other two hypotheses of the origin of man cannot boast of excessive logic, however, having a certain charm, they are very popular among romantic natures and people close to religion. Of course, we are talking about supernatural forces.

The opinion about the divine origin of man exists all over the world in a wide variety of variations, sometimes shocking in their extravagance. For example, we can take the Christian doctrine, according to which Adam, the first man in the history of the world, was created from the dust of the earth. Ancient mythology has a slightly different, although no less divine, interpretation of this phenomenon, not to mention the ancient Sumerians or Egyptians.

However, all these assumptions have one thing in common - God created man, and this is not necessarily the traditional idea of ​​the Almighty - a certain shade of supernaturalism is enough, up to the idea of ​​​​a certain higher mind that created the world.

Another branch of opinion centers on alien intervention. In this case, we are most often talking about the artificial settlement of the planet by some more developed extraterrestrial beings.

In action, these 3 hypotheses of human origin are often shown in all kinds of films and described in a wide variety of literature.

People are so fickle...

It should be noted that the listed hypotheses of human origin are only at this stage coexist peacefully. If you pay attention to the very process of human development, you will notice how changeable its views on the world are.

For example, one could not even mention the natural, and even more so the cosmic, origin of humanity in the Middle Ages, unless, of course, one wanted to end one’s existence at the stake of the Inquisition. This is the era of complete dominance of religion over all other spheres of life and activity. During this period it was simply impossible to assume anything other than a divine origin. Absolute all-consuming faith has long eclipsed everything else, forcing humanity to exist within strictly defined boundaries - between hell and heaven.

Other hypotheses about the origin of man existed before this. Aristotle, for example, appealed to the animal origin of our entire species.

In a word, at one time or another the world was inclined towards a wide variety of points of view. Today, theories coexist peacefully without interfering with each other.

Animal nature in us

When considering hypotheses of human origin, we should probably start with the evolutionary one, or, as it is also called, the natural one. As mentioned earlier, thoughts about this arose back in Ancient Greece. Aristotle called man a “political animal,” focusing on this component of our nature.

From a scientific point of view, this hypothesis of the origin of man from the ape is based on the natural development of the body under the influence of various external factors, such as the habitat, the need for work and survival.

Obeying the category of authority, the modern world has chosen the founder of this assumption. It is so accepted that the evolutionary hypothesis about the origin of man was put forward by Charles Darwin. It cannot be denied that the first precise formulation of it belonged to him, but thoughts on this matter arose much earlier.

First people

According to this theory, the predecessors of humans can be considered australopithecines - upright primates of a fairly low organization. This species already led a terrestrial lifestyle and, having inherited a number of qualities from its predecessors, improved them and developed new ones.

Australopithecines were characterized by a gregarious lifestyle and quite developed ability adapting various items to suit your own needs. Of course, in this case we are not yet talking about a highly developed organization, but the use of improvised means for obtaining food was quite typical for them.

As for the external data of our distant, distant ancestors, the found remains suggest that Australopithecines were relatively small in size - they were stocky primates whose height did not exceed 130 centimeters. Their brain section was quite large, while the facial part was slightly developed and had a shortened structure.

Pithecanthropus

The remains of the next in development predecessors of the human race were discovered on the island of Java by E. Dubois. Pithecanthropus differed from the previous “version” in the more developed structure of the cranium and larger size. In addition, if Australopithecines were not yet fully upright, the Pithecanthropus that followed them already had this feature. In addition, there is evidence that already at this stage ancient man used fire for his own purposes, which was a very significant step in development.

Paleoanthropus

In the modern world, the followers of Pithecanthropus are better known as Neanderthals. At this stage, man had already learned not only to use fire, but also significantly improved his tools and way of life. Archaeologists were able to find numerous sites that testified to a much higher organization.

In terms of physique, Neanderthals were much more similar to modern humans than their predecessors. Their height reached almost 165 cm, but the skull was still significantly different from the modern one.

The closest to us

Finally, natural evolution allowed our distant ancestors to come as close as possible to the modern appearance, although, of course, there were still significant differences.

Cro-Magnons, or neoanthropes, had a tall stature due to developed long legs, a powerful torso and well-developed muscles. They used not only wooden, but also flint and bone tools, which researchers were able to find in large quantities at numerous sites.

Neoanthropes did not have any specific habitat - their remains were found almost all over the world in areas that were suitable for human life.

About evolution in general

To summarize all of the above, we can note the main principle of this hypothesis of human origin, which is natural development under the influence of external factors.

The formation of modern man, according to this theory, began approximately three million years ago. The found sites and remains of our possible ancestors give a clear idea of ​​how exactly our ancestors were formed, what they learned from century to century before they flew into space or invented a cure for the most complex diseases.

The main disadvantage of the hypothesis

Despite the maximum rationality of this assumption and material evidence of the development of the human race, evolutionists can be confused by just one phrase: “Where did primates come from then?” Common hypotheses about the origins of human interaction lead to the endless question: “Where from?” The further we delve into evolution, the clearer and broader this dilemma becomes, which can be called the main trump card of adherents of the hypothesis of divine origin.

In the image and likeness

The religious hypothesis of human origin is the second, and in some periods of history, the first in popularity. As mentioned earlier, it is based on the fact that the whole world was created by some divine principle, higher mind, Absolute.

The most striking example of such an opinion can be called the same Christian doctrine, which does not allow for a different origin of the human race.

Despite the rather fundamental differences between world religions, in almost all of them the origin of the world comes down to the divine principle - the act of creation.

Where is the evidence?

Of course, this assumption has both its advantages and significant disadvantages, the main one of which is the lack of any evidence of legality. If Darwin's hypothesis about the origin of man was based on facts - archaeological finds, the natural process of development, observations of nature as a whole, then the hypothesis of divine origin is powerless in this regard, since it is based on faith, and it, as we know, is rather relative.

However, this does not particularly bother creationists, since, whatever one may say, there is something in modern man that cannot simply be explained from a scientific point of view. When criticizing other common hypotheses of human origins, they most often appeal to the fact that it is artificially impossible to reproduce a full-fledged human eye.

Even Charles Darwin, who is commonly called the founder of evolutionary theory, said that such a perfect system could not have developed naturally.

In some ways this, of course, challenges the popular hypothesis of evolutionary origins, but where is the likelihood that simply human knowledge has not yet reached such a level that the organization of a given system has become understandable?

Another argument of supporters of the hypothesis of human origin with the participation of the divine principle is genetics. The fact is that all the research and data obtained indicate that the human genome is aimed at stabilization, not development. Its main task is to preserve appearance the whole organism, and not its change, which casts doubt on the natural process of transformation of Australopithecus into a modern resident of the metropolis.

Space

If the first two assumptions, in principle, required certain explanations, then in this case everything is clear. The cosmic hypothesis of human origins claims that we all live today thanks to alien intervention. Some say that modern humanity was created as an intricate experiment. Others see this as saving the species by moving to another planet.

Modern hypotheses about the origin of man as a whole are in one way or another reduced to outer space. This is not surprising, because it is space that is currently of greatest interest from a scientific point of view due to its lack of exploration. Given the infinite scale of millions of galaxies, it is difficult to believe that earthlings are truly the only living beings.

More details about space

The very origin of man, theories and hypotheses regarding the origin of life on Earth in general is a very, very fascinating phenomenon. Even the described model of the formation of the human race has almost endless branches and features.

Various hypotheses of the origin of man are quite common these days, but the existence of several opinions in one key cannot be ignored.

For example, despite the fact that we all came from outer space, this could have happened by crossing the primates that then lived on Earth with more highly developed aliens. There is another assumption - experiments in genetic engineering, a homuncular method of creation.

Some assumptions that fit into the cosmic hypothesis seem simply funny, but still have a right to exist.

The strangest assumptions

Now that we have briefly examined all the main hypotheses of the origin of man, let us pay attention to the most unusual thing that the human mind has come up with in this regard.

Terence McKenna, for example, does not deny origins from monkeys, but he proposed... hallucinogenic mushrooms as a catalyst for evolution.

According to this American, the unusual experience of comprehending the essence of being in the form of drug intoxication evoked the most vivid images in the mind of the unfortunate ancestor, which he began to try to understand, which became the reason for the active development of the brain. In a sense, this American “outdid” all other hypotheses of the origin of man on Earth.

However, an equally original theory belongs to psychologist Julian Jaynes, who proposed the idea of ​​a “bicameral mind.” The author of the hypothesis studied ancient literature, on the basis of which he concluded that our prehistoric ancestors did not perform independent actions at all, but only carried out orders from the so-called gods. In a word, according to the psychologist, the cause of evolution was a special form of schizophrenia. According to this theory, the hemispheres of the brain of the predecessors of modern man worked autonomously - one was responsible for everyday tasks, and the other was responsible for the awareness of unusual phenomena.

The main disadvantage of this system was a single language center, which simply could not cope with such complex brain processes and led to hallucinations. If we consider the picture holistically, the situation is as follows: the hemispheres periodically had to communicate with each other, and in this case the voice of one was considered as instructions from above, since self-awareness was impossible for a person at that time.

To support his own theory, Julian Jaynes gave the example of imaginary friends that many children invent for themselves. The psychologist considered split personality to be a more radical proof of the validity of his hypothesis.

A slightly less strange assumption was made by Oxford University lecturer Colin Blackmore, who put forward the theory of gene mutation. According to his assumption, the development of humanity occurred completely by chance - a small deviation led to the emergence of a stronger individual, adapted to survival. Since it was this factor that contributed most to the continuation of the race, it gradually took hold, and the mutation became permanent, improving further.

This hypothesis is supported by the fact that recent studies of the human genome have led to the discovery of the unique SRGAP2 gene, which has no analogues in any other living organism on the planet. The fact is that this gene is responsible specifically for brain development. And the fact that it is unique to humans in some way confirms the theory of mutation, which made it possible to make such a significant leap in evolution.

It is noteworthy that all attempts to implant this gene into other organisms were unsuccessful and led to the death of experimental animals. A person, as it turned out, has “backup copies” of it, which, according to scientists, are designed to replace the main one in case of its absence or damage. In fact, there is only one version of a full copy of the original version of SRGAP2 in human DNA. In addition to it, there is so-called “genetic garbage”, which, although it has a similar structure, cannot be a full replacement.

Art and human origins

The origin of man, theories and hypotheses about him, as mentioned earlier, have been repeatedly reflected in art and culture. Various variations of ideas about the divine principle are found quite often in cinema, painting, sculpture, not to mention literature, the basis for which to one degree or another is the Bible.

The main hypotheses of the origin of man are constantly being challenged, supplemented, altered and adjusted to suit the modern world, which, naturally, cannot but affect the development of culture.

Remember, for example, Stanley Kubrick's Planet of the Apes. Or the cult “Interstellar” by Christopher Nolan, which very vividly plays with the idea of ​​temporal and spatial movement, populating planets with new people? Or “Lucy” by Luc Besson, in which, by and large, all the main hypotheses of human origins are mixed...

The whole difficulty lies in the fact that among all this diversity of ideas and opinions it is impossible to single out the only true one. All assumptions to one degree or another seem logical, justified and understandable. Hypotheses of human origins are briefly described in school textbooks around the world, fundamentally outlined in scientific works great minds, but still this did not lead to a solution to the most important issue.

Who knows... Maybe humanity is already on the verge of a grand discovery, or maybe it will never be destined to comprehend this truth. Time will put everything in its place.