The Open Anatomy Journal

2010, 2 : 86-97
Published online 2010 November 5. DOI: 10.2174/1877609401002010086
Publisher ID: TOANATJ-2-86

RESEARCH ARTICLE
 Comparative Anatomy, Anthropology and Archaeology as Case Studies on the Influence of Human Biases in Natural Sciences: The Origin of ‘Humans’, of ‘Behaviorally Modern Humans’ and of ‘Fully Civilized Humans’

Rui Diogo, *
Center for the Advanced Study of Hominid Paleobiology, Department of Anthropology, George Washington University, 2110 G Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20052, USA

* Address correspondence to this author at the Center for the Advanced Study of Hominid Paleobiology, Department of Anthropology, George Washington University, 2110 G Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20052, USA, Tel: 001-202-994-6075, Fax: 001-202-994-6097, E-mail: rui_diogo@hotmail.com

ABSTRACT

Natural sciences are considered to be exact sciences. However, despite usually being effectively usually more ‘objective’ than for instance social sciences, they are not immune to a problem common to all sciences: the intrinsic psychological, sociological and/or historical biases of the scientists. In the present paper I will briefly discuss the influence of these biases in natural sciences, using anthropology, archaeology and comparative anatomy as case studies. I will specifically discuss how these influences have lead scientists to ‘actively search’ and supposedly ‘find’ data to support that the first ‘humans’, the first ‘behaviorally modern humans’ and the first ‘fully civilized or sophisticated humans’ were mostly originated in Europe, in some cases to the extent of fabricating false scientific evidence.

Keywords:

Anthropology, archaeology, biases, comparative anatomy, cultural revolution, facial expressions, human evolution, palaeolithic archaeology, piltdown hoax..