John D. Speth's Argumentative Analysis

Introduction Neanderthals, though extinct, are the closest relatives of modern humans (Szalay 2013). Their appearance was similar to that of Homo sapiens, but they came with a few minor differences including larger brow ridges, shorter height, and a more muscular build. However, an aspect of Neanderthals has often sparked heated debates among researchers and anthropologists: Were Neanderthals intelligent, or unintelligent? This paper will evaluate the two sides of this debate, with a focus on anthropologist John D. Speth’s position, and determine which opposition is more convincing based on the logic of given evidence.
The Neanderthal Debate Researchers often come to a disagreement when discussing the intellectual capabilities of our closest relatives. …show more content…
In one instance, he argued that the ideas of functional tools of Neanderthals were stolen from modern humans (Speth 2004). Even if they were capable of developing these tools on their own, (2004:4) he stated that “these morons couldn’t possibly have comprehended their symbolic significance.” Further evidence supports this idea as the tools developed by modern humans were no more efficient than the tools of Neanderthals (O’Leary 2014), suggesting that these ideas were stolen. Some also argue that Neanderthals learned such skills from Homo sapiens, further validating this point. However, even if this is the case, others say the Neanderthals still had to teach themselves how the tools worked, how they were made, and why they were used (O’Leary 2014). They first had to understand the significance of the tools to be able to achieve them, which suggests that they were, indeed, capable of intelligence. Why would they waste the effort in stealing these ideas if they did not first comprehend their significance? Logically, the argument for intelligent Neanderthals seems to be more strongly