Week 1: Jan 13 Questions (Chapt 1)

Chapter 1: An Animal of No Significance

1. According to the author, who were our "cousins" and "siblings"?

2. Harari argues that different human species did not develop in a straight line. What are his reasons?

3. What were the costs to Homo Sapiens for being wise?

4. What is the author trying to say in the following passages? Do you agree with him? Explain.

Pg 3 - Do you agree with the author’s use of the word “history”? i.e., history is only the ‘development of human culture’ and not the previous 13 billion years?

Pg 5 - What do you think/feel when you consider the author’s statement that: “Just 6 million years ago, a single female ape had 2 daughters. One became the ancestor of all chimpanzees, the other is our own grandmother.”

Pg 5/6 - Homo sapiens were not the only ‘humans,;’ we had brother and sister species as well. How does that affect how you see the place of humans today in the world (if at all)?

Pg 6 - The author states he thinks it is “…doubtful whether Homo sapiens will still be around a thousand years from now.” From your reading of the chapter and/or your understanding of humans today, what might be some of his reasons for making that statement? Do you agree or disagree?

Pg 10 - The author suggests that ‘humans are born early and underdeveloped compared to most animals’, coming out more like ‘molten glass than glazed earthenware from a kiln.’ He argues that this initial malleability is what makes it possible today to “educate our children to become Christian or Buddhist, capitalist or socialist, warlike or peace-loving.” Does this suggest that humans are born innately amoral (being neither ‘good’ nor ‘bad’) and it is solely our lived experience that drives our development into the children and adults we become? Or, do humans have a natural/innate tendency to be good? Or bad?

Pg 14/15 - The Interbreeding Theory vs. Replacement Theory

What are the differences? (See pg 14/15) Why is this potentially political dynamite? What will it mean, if the initial DNA reports that indicate some interbreeding happened, are true?

Pg 18 - The author asks, “What kind of cultures, societies, and political structures would have emerged in a world where several different human species coexisted?” Your thoughts?

Pg 18 - “Our lack of brothers and sisters makes it easier to imagine that we are the epitome of creation, and that a chasm separates us from the rest of the animal kingdom. When Charles Darwin indicated that Homo sapiens was just another kind of animal, people were outraged. Even today many refuse to believe it.” If we were to accept that we are not the epitome of creation, that there isn’t that big a chasm between us and other animals (as science is increasingly demonstrating), what would the implications be?

Pg 11/12 - The author suggests that our position at the top of the food chain is not only a relatively new occurrence, but it happened in a “spectacular leap” from the middle to the top. In other words, while the other ‘top’ species (lions etc.) evolved slowly into that position, we jumped up the chain (by our use of fire, for example). He argues that this quick leap has not ‘enabled the ecosystems to develop checks and balances’ which might prevent us from ‘wreaking too much havoc.’ Unlike most other ‘top predators’ on the planet, we have ‘fears and anxieties over our position, making us doubly cruel and dangerous,’ and that it is this that has resulted in our deadly wars and ecological catastrophes.