Neanderthal Interbreeding? Neanderthal introduced language to humans?

There is a large body of critique of modern science. One of the major figures was Thomas Kuhn, whose work on paradigm shifts has had an enormous impact in the sociology of science. Influential thinkers like Polanyi and Marcuse have been arguing agaist so-called scientific neutrality since at least the 1960s, and there are much earlier critiques than those. Kuhn saw science as a social practice complete with social agendas, and this perspective opens up the door to an investigation of both ideological bias and vested interest in the supposedly pure and objective practice of science. Later expansions of his ideas by other have led to a lot of discussion of the role of capitalism and state socialism in science, and the way funding drives the direction of research, particularly in the areas of military funding and commercial projects. You could look at Feyerabend, Rouse, Beck among others for developments of the theories. A perfect example of what the critics mean can be found in the global warming and nuclear power debates. In the global warming debate the two competing ideologies are free market environmentalism (which many, myself included, see as an oxymoron) and the radical Green approach, which sees capitalism as the major problem, not the answer. Scientists are not immune from ideologies (talk about an understatement), so we have the spectacle of one set of scientists denying global warming or humanity's part in it if it is occurring, and another much larger group predicting imminent disaster. What the public are supposed to make of this clash between two groups of supposedly objective, rational experts beggars description. And the second major element over tha past twenty years has been the predominance of right-wing governments, particularly in the US, UK, and Australia, whose ideological preoccupations have been very much based in what some have called free market fundamentalism, so the political vested interest has played a major role. As for Neanderthal man, we could always save time and just read The Clan of the Cave Bear lol. Lash

Such a research may have serious politicalimplications also. It may lead to claims of superiority of one race over another. Already I have seen such a study in a newspaper one year back. Scientists should be humanists also or we will have more 'atom bombs'. Science should pursue truth but only the truth that unifies humankind.

I don't know if I am coming close to what you are asking. But I guess the influence of the 'theory' that leads the scientists towards a particular direction is huge. And the theory is shaped by the scientific community generally. And the motive to be within the paradigm of the scientific thinking,I guess, is influential.

I watched that show yesterday and I found it absolutely fascinating and somewhat of a verification and confirmation of what I have believed for a long time. I have always thought that modern humans, meaning us present day humans, can be so incredibly arrogant with our attitude of superiority over other living creatures, past and present. We never give them the credit they deserve. So even though the Neanderthals may have looked slightly different, I hardly think that they could be the stupid, dim witted, grunting brutes that they've always been portrayed to be. It simply didn't make any sense to me. I think most of the historical sciences have failed to take into consideration just how long they were here! It would be extremely hard to believe that they didn't have a very complex, innovative, communicative, and cooperative society. I'm extremely happy to have alternative and scientifically based evidence to back that up and I sincerely hope they continue with further research. I don't see a negative in the ideas presented. Like with all sciences, you start with theories, then gather as much evidence as possible to prove or disprove the theories. It takes time, effort and money to prove or disprove the theories and turn them into fact or fiction. So if this perpetuates interest in this branch of science I say more power to them. Like you I am very interested in reading further studies and DNA evidence. As far as examples, without scientific theory leading to scientific proof we would still be living like the Neanderthals.

I wanted to comment on this before running off to bed. I'm having trouble seeing the screen though, as I have a migraine on the way *going blind in one eye* So I'll be short and possibly full of typos that I can't see. It is unfortunate that the motivations of researchers to prove one thing or another are what drive many of them to do their research, when it should simply be a motivation to discover the truth. *sigh* I'll get onto examples later... when I can see again... and when I can think straight. Great topic, by the way.