Doing things: reconstructing hominin cognitive evolution from the archeological record

Abstract

Following Pain’s (2021) critical assessment of the prospects of minimal capacity inferences within cognitive archeology based on ‘classical’ cognitive science, I elaborate on the chances of these inferences within so-called embodied, embedded, extended, and enacted (4E) frameworks. Cognitive archeologists infer the cognitive abilities of past hominins from the remains found in the archeological record. Here they face the problem of choosing a theory from the cognitive sciences. Results vary considerably, depending on one’s cognitive theory, so choice matters. Where classical views conceive cognition as mainly involving representations and computing, more recent 4E approaches focus on interactions between environment, body, and brain: hence the same trace, like a stone tool, might require capacities like a mental ‘blueprint’ according to the former, but only environmentally guided perception according to the latter. Given this crucial choice of theory, what are the prospects of 4E then? I present a model of cognitive hominin evolution based on 4E and niche construction theory. Based on this model, I argue that we should be guardedly optimistic: contrary to first impressions, minimal capacity inferences work well within the 4E framework, and adopting 4E might give us a methodological advantage, too.