Paleoanthropology’s uses of the bipedal criterion

Abstract

Bipedalism is one of the criteria that paleoanthropologists use in order to interpret the fossil record and to determine if a specimen belongs to the human lineage. In the context of such interpretations, bipedalism is considered to be a unique characteristic of this lineage that also marks its origin. This conception has largely remained unchallenged over the last decades, in spite of fossil discoveries that led to the emergence of bipedalism in the human lineage being shifted back by several millions of years. In this paper, I analyze the uses of this criterion in paleoanthropology and demonstrate that interpretative biases (such as underdetermined inferences and circular reasoning) are at play in interpretations of hominin remains. By discussing Darwin's hypotheses about the evolution of bipedalism, I identify major theoretical issues that need to be addressed in the current debates on hominin evolution. First, the assumption that "man alone has become a biped" (Darwin in The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex, John Murray, London, 1871) is analyzed in the light of recent empirical data. Three major issues are discussed: the definition of "man", i.e. "human", the uniqueness of human bipedalism, and the equivocal meaning of being a "biped". Then, I highlight some of Darwin's remarks that may be helpful for current debates in paleoanthropology, regarding natural selection in locomotor evolution, as well as taxonomic and phylogenetic significance of functional features. Finally, I analyze two examples of how fossil discoverers referred to Darwin in the recent years and discuss his role as an intellectual support.

Neanderthals as familiar strangers and the human spark: How the ‘golden years’ of Neanderthal research reopen the question of human uniqueness

“…Although researchers develop technological windows that provide access to the lost world of Pleistocene existence, Neanderthals continue to serve as mirrors reflecting how we want to see ourselves. Interpretations of fossil specimens have always been influenced by assumptions about what is to be considered ‘human’ or ‘humanness’ (Corbey 2012 ; Lequin 2018 ). Neanderthal discourse is still under the sway of tenacious implicit biases and preconceptions, and this notably applies to the widespread conviction that, because ‘we’ survived and ‘they’ became extinct, our ancestors must have been superior to them.…”

Past materials, past minds: The philosophy of cognitive paleoanthropology

“…This requires complex inferential strategies demanding philosophical analysis. These include the character of the inferences used in the field (Currie & Killin, 2019;Pain, 2021), the role of "bridge" (or 'midrange') theory (Botha, 2016;Currie, 2018), the methods of inference by minimally required capacities (Killin & Pain, 2023a;Wynn, 1979Wynn, , 2002 or by causal associations (Currie & Killin, 2019;Killin, 2021), interpretive biases, including widely-held disciplinary assumptions (Gero, 2007;Lequin, 2018), the inheritance of problems pertaining to particular theories used to provision an inference (Killin & Pain, 2023b), and the extent to which past materials can be taken as a "simple reflection" of genetically endowed cognitive abilities (Sterelny, 2011(Sterelny, , 2017.…”

Bringing Darwin into the social sciences and the humanities: cultural evolution and its philosophical implications

“…The article by philosopher of science Mathilde Lequin, ''Paleoanthropology's uses of the bipedal criterion'', focuses on conceptual difficulties concerning the use of bipedalism in paleoanthropology to mark the start of the human lineage. On the basis of a philosophical analysis she offers some suggestions in order to move the current debates concerning bipedalism forward (Lequin 2017).…”