The written language is the marker for the modern humans that we are today...with the intellect that we have.
I am aware that this is your standpoint.
However, you have given no support for this, nor any sort of way by which would can objectively measure the intellect that you associate with written language. Do you believe that intellect suddenly spiked with the advent of written language, and that this spike marks the beginning of what you would call "modern man"?
what sort of 'creatures anatomically identical' to modern humans do you mean???
I didn't think this would be a difficult question. There are fossils of humans (i.e., Homo sapiens) that predate the advent of written language. The only difference between those humans and the humans of 5000 years ago is written language.
Would you argue that those Amazon tribes and African tribes that still have not invented written language are not "modern man"?
Would you argue that, at 5000 years ago, all humans became "modern man" with the advent of written language, or just those humans that used written language (surely you're aware that not all humans at that time used written language)?
Would you argue that, up until the late 19th century or so, a large portion of the population of the United States (and probably Australia, too, though I don't know the history there very well) were not "modern man" because they could not read or write?
Would you argue that written language is enough of a distinction between two groups of hominids to call them different species?
Edited by Bluejay, : Addition and minor correction
I can see that you've got a consistent idea in your head, but I don't think you understand the implications.
i believe we were created with [the capacity for speech]. so for me, 'modern man' would equate to the creation of Adam & Eve...
...I do acknowledge that the species that came before us were real...however, i also believe that they, like all other animals, were created for a purpose and when their purpose was realized, they were permitted to become extinct....like the dinosaurs for instance.
More power to you for it, Peg.
But, youâ€™ve got to account for the fact that, not only are there humans anatomically identical to modern humans living before the first signs of written language, but some of these pre-writing fossils connect genetically to modern humans! That means humans living today are the descendants of pre-writing humans, which completely refutes your notion that writing humans are distinct from pre-writing humans.
i certainly think that written language is unique to todays humans...i've never been presented with anything different...and as i've already stated, written language has only been around for the last 5,000 odd years... unless you can present anything different on this???
I can make similar arguments for spoken language, stone masonry, slavery, the sword, currency, the fur trade, democracy, the theory of evolution, the automobile, the atomic bomb, the computer and cloning (as well as thousands of other major advancements).
What makes you think written language is such a magical singularity in human history that humans who have it must be considered a distinct species from humans who predated it? And, how come these other great achievements donâ€™t mark the advent of new species?