Re: AAT Theory

David L Burkhead (
2 Oct 1995 12:00:05 GMT

In article <> (H. M. Hubey) writes:
> (David L Burkhead ) writes:
>> "Grasping" yes, but not _manipulating_. Those are not the same
>>tasks. Again, look at what we actually find. Monkeys and apes
>It's at times like these I wish we had fuzzy variables. Let's see
>on a scale [1,10] for hand capability we have modern humans
>at 10, say chimps at 8, bears at 6, dogs at 3, cats at 4...
>what's next? Aha, crocs at 2.
>So what's the point?

??? Have you bothered to even _read_ my posts or do you just
scan them for snippets to take out of context. The point is that
limbs _preadapted_ for a particular type of task will tend to be
_used_ for that purpose. The forelimbs of monkeys and apes are
preadapted for manipulating objects, permitting tool use. These other
animals you cited have no such preadaptation. Thus, should an ape or
monkey develop a survival strategy that relied on tool use (and it is
quite clear that one _did_, since we have a rather long record of
those tool-users, culminating in ourselves), then it would be easiest
to use those limbs, which are already used to manipulate object
to--manipulate objects (tools, in this case). How extraordinarily
strange to use a body part to do what it is adapted to do. And how
remarkable that specialization in this field would leave the body part
less suited for other functions (such as locomotion). How truly
remarkable all this is, ne? <fe>

David L. Burkhead

Spacecub - The Artemis Project - Artemis Magazine

Box 831
Akron, OH 44309-0831