Homo Communis

as an anthropologist I have proposed that our species name be changed to homo communis . Communism was the original human revolution 2.5 million years ago at the beginning of the Stone Age . Marx and Engels refer to it as “primitive communism.” Communism is our species nature .

http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2014/05/is-human-nature-social-or-selfish-i.html

http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2020/12/differentia-specifica-of-human-species.html

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/index.htm .

http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2021/05/culturally-inherited-adaptations-give.html

The first human societies had an extraordinarily high survival need to be able to rely on each other at levels of solidarity that we cannot even imagine. The intensity of the network of social connections of a band of 25 to 50 people living in the ecological food chain location would almost constitute a new level of organic organization and integrity above individual bodies; ancient kinship/culture systems as super-organic bodies; the human social group as harmonious multi-individual Body, organism. The Individual human bodies, all of the Some Bodies , were very frail and weak relative to the field of predators they were escaping. Up-right posture made them slower runners, too ! The dominance of the food chain that humans ultimately reached even in the Stone Age could be reached only by super-social , super internally-cooperative, super-intra-species harmony, because they had relatively_frail_ individual bodies, and needed each other's support. It is clear to me that natural selection picked hominid groups with policies of "love thy neighbor as thyself " and "charity" over those that might have derived principles of "selfishness and greed", if there were any in the Stone Age before Civilization. Institutionalized war would have been selected against .

The Battle for Democracy : Central Task in Class Struggle

Lenin says democracy is still a state . The bourgeoisie’s preferred form of rule is a Democratic Republican shell. For Communists , there is a battle for democracy between the Proletariat and the Bourgeoisie in capitalist society. It’s the central political task for the Proletariat in the class struggle “ We have seen above, that the first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class to win the battle of democracy.” https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch02.htm .

Emmeline Pankhurst : Revolutionary Feminist Creed

Woman’s History Month : Revolutionary Feminism WE HAVE TO FREE HALF THE HUMAN RACE ,THE WOMEN, SO THAT THEY CAN HELP TO FREE THE OTHER HALF - EMMELINE PANKHURST Pankhurst correctly refers to the human race impliedly as a sexually reproducing animal species with binary complementary opposite sexes , yin / yang , viva la difference . Race here = Rainbow Coalition, of the human species . All “races” are part of the human race ; and Pankhurst refers to them all as the same species. Pankhurst comradely presumes that the whole human race , or 99.99 % of it , is in need of freeing itself from the .001 %. Practical-Critical Pankhurst proposes a strategy for working class and women’s self-emancipation-revolutionary feminism . Ladies first revolution http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2022/03/antoinette-blackwell-quotes.html

Birth of a Radical Feminist

“Birth of a Radical Feminist " by Jamae Hawkins I reached my peak “trans” moment at the same time I was done being a Liberal. It occurred several days after I marched in the Woman's March January 21, 2017, shortly after Donald Trump's inauguration. Being a dedicated Democratic Liberal, I wanted to bask in the glow of being inclusive to everyone's issue and to object Donald J. Trump being president. Women wore pink pussy hats and vagina costumes, I thought it was clever and expressive. I was participating in the march because I was just damn pissed that we elected a wanna be dictator and wanted to physically be in front of the White House to express displeasure. The march was peaceful and well attended by all people representing all different issues. I no longer saw it as just a women’s march but a solidarity of citizens disturbed about what is to come. Days after the march, social media was flooded with trans activists complaining that they were violently excluded. Huh? They said that by women wearing pussy hats and wearing vagina costumes they were excluded because not all women have vaginas and by that exclusion those women were committing violence against them. WTF? What the hell does that even mean? From what I saw of the march, no one was excluded because everyone is pissed. I discovered that women describing their own existence is offensive to transgender women and their activists. In making the very statement of “Trans women aren't women, Trans men aren’t men”, women were slammed and labeled a “TERF” in comment sections of social media articles regarding trans issues. A “TERF” is an acronym that stands for “Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist”. I FIRMLY believed that left wing politics did not deny science. I only subscribed to casual feminism at best, I didn’t even know what a Radical Feminist was until I was called that name. That by describing basic concepts as: Male is Male and Female is Female. The definition of WOMAN is an ADULT HUMAN FEMALE and a MAN is a ADULT HUMAN MALE. I have been labeled a bigot just making that statement. Then it hit me how much it bothered me to be called a bigot and in that instant I didn’t give a care in the world. Who cares? I can be called any and every name in the book but I will not deny reality for the likes of anyone. That was the moment when I realized that I that my political ideology as a liberal was dead. Males trying to transition to female or females trying to transition to males are not a race or cultural group. They are a small number of men or women who for a range of reasons, usually some kind of mental illness or sexual fetish, who wish to be of the opposite biological sex. The delusion of “being in the wrong body” is a symptom of underlying and untreated mental illness. My former views on transgender ideology were basic, I figured that people who wanted to be of the opposite sex would want to take on the issues of their desired sex. That has not been the case. I have seen enough on social media to see a pattern of behavior in large number of those who identify as male transitioning to female. What I have seen involves threats of violence if you don't subscribe to their way of thinking that biological males can be made female or biological females can be made male. I have witnessed liberal feminists immediately shutting down any immoderate opinions. As soon as someone makes a slightly critical comment or question, they are called a TERF, bigot, told to fuck off, die, be raped, and then immediately blocked, inhibiting any conversation at all. Another dismissive tactic is to minimize the issue as “just toilets”, particularly with the disingenuous refrain “let them pee”. This ignores that the push to substitute sex with gender identity affects everything from changing rooms, to women’s sports, midwifery, lesbian spaces, media reporting on male violence, parenting practices, government policy, reporting, data collection, and women’s rights to protest. Trans women seem very detached from the true reality of women’s lives, which is shocking in the sense they want to be female so bad. A lot of trans women seem to have an obsession with being “validated” by getting catcalled on the street by other dudes (even if they themselves aren’t sexually attracted to other males) or being called derogatory terms associated with women. If trans rights were about being treated equally, I would reconsider showing my support, but these days trans rights is simply about women pretending trans women and women are the same. In the past few years trans women have campaigned to close women's domestic violence shelters for not accepting them, for trans girls to be able to harass girls in their own changing rooms, to allow trans women with male anatomies to go into women's changing rooms and make us uncomfortable, to co-opt every single women's cause for their own. Trans women are attempting to steal women's identities and be "better women than women" and then tell us that we're bigots for saying ENOUGH. This is no different than a white “trans racial” person who believes they are black telling black people who are born black to stop talking about their experiences because it's racist. That is exactly the same thing. Trans women seek to move women out of the way, to dilute what it means to be a woman; they are the neo-wave misogyny. Trans people make up an incredibly minute percentage of the population, so why must women erase their identities to satisfy trans women? Why can't trans women claim their own identity instead of appropriating the issues of women? Stop trying to erase the female experience. There is no way to change BIOLOGICAL sex, GENDER is a societal construct that assigns characteristics and behavior in response to BIOLOGICAL sex. Sex reassignment surgery (SRS) is real and it involves sterilization and mutilation. For males, the full reassignment is a horror story of a wound that constantly needs tending for the rest of their lives. Many men who have gone through this are now feeling devastated but many are also in denial which is why they are so angry. Sorry the truth hurts and life ain’t fair. I do actually feel for some of these men and women but at the end of the day gender is not biological sex. They feel they were "born" the wrong gender when in fact our society has such rigid performance roles for males and females (gender = the performance of sex roles) that they will go to extreme lengths to become what they believe is the opposite gender. What they don't realize is that these gender roles are not real they are social constructs and you can change your gender any time you like without mutilating yourself. It will not make you biologically the opposite sex however. No one perfectly performs masculinity or femininity. People who feel that they cannot act/dress the way they want to because of their sex are not shrugging off the standard gender roles – they are buying into it. They are accepting the argument that a man cannot be feminine. So they change their bodies in some cases in order to ‘be women’ and therefore be allowed to be feminine. In other cases, they do not change their bodies but demand to be called women, deny their male biology, etc. In both situations the person has changed their identity or body in order to conform to the expectation that women are feminine and men are masculine. Becoming ‘a woman’ in order to be feminine in a socially-acceptable way is doing nothing to challenge gender stereotypes for males or females. It is literally buying into them. Shrugging off the standard gender roles would be to say, I am a man. I am male. I will dress femininely, so suck it up and vice-versa. There’s my armchair analysis of what I’ve observed in these men and women. This is why I am a Radical Feminist."

All-American Socialism

CB : Yes US has substantial socialism still within overall capitalism. That’s a fantastic list demonstrating it in the article below

We need socialized medicine and nationalization of the too-big-to-fail banks and corporations for full socialism.

The American federal government invented the internet: Socialism with American characteristics

https://www.facebook.com/ajplusenglish/videos/598700563604788/?vh=e

/// “Many people fear socialism, but that’s because they misunderstand what it actually is.

Democratic socialism already exists at all levels of our government, and not only do we love it, we can’t do without it and when it’s threatened, we even fight tooth and nail to keep it.

In the U.S., we collectively tax ourselves to pay for programs and projects that benefit quality of life for society as a whole. That’s a form of socialism, and it’s how we live.

Examples of socialism are:

Local police, and state and federal law enforcement agencies like the FBI and CIA Public libraries Fire departments Public garbage collection and landfills Emergency medical response systems Construction and maintenance of roads, highways, streets, traffic control systems like stop signals, and safety amenities, like sidewalks and street lighting Free public schools Social Security Medicare Farmer subsidies Federally-funded student loans and grants All branches of the U.S. Military The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Public water systems that assure we have safe drinking water The 1936 Rural Electrification Act that brought electricity to farms and rural areas of America The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), which enforces workplace safety Public parks like Lincoln Park, Canyon View Park and the Riverfront Trail system Bridges, dams and irrigation systems Sewer systems Drainage systems Jails and prisons Municipal, state and federal court systems The Veterans Administration and Veterans’ Medical Centers and hospitals Public beaches Medicaid Free school lunch programs Snow removal from streets, roads and highways Public immunization programs The U.S. Postal Service

Typical right-wingers misunderstand how socialism benefits Americans every day. National Parks

The U.S. Mint Federal Deposit Insurance that protects bank accounts of up to $250,000 from loss Inspection of meat, dairy and foods to protect against contamination of our food supply National parks and monuments Free job training programs like the Job Corps, that help turn youth into functioning, tax-paying citizens who benefit society Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) that assists victims of hurricanes, floods and fires Embassies that help Americans when they are overseas Elimination of diseases like Typhoid, Polio, Smallpox and Yellow Fever The National Institutes of Health research leading to advances in treating diseases like cancer, Parkinson’s and Alzheimers No one individual or private company could ever do all this. None of these activities generate a profit, either, which is why government should never be run like a business, since businesses are dependent on making profits to survive. The reason we have government is because government can do what people cannot do for themselves individually, to improve our quality of life and assure our safety. That’s socialism, and there is clearly a large component of it in our society already.

The taxpayer-funded, government-operated public programs listed above and many others are responsible for the extraordinarily high quality of life we enjoy as Americans.

That is why paying taxes is a patriotic act, and it’s what really makes America great.

http://annelandmanblog.com/2020/02/socialism-is-already-here-and-we-love-it/ .

Theory of the structure of symbols and trans generational teaching /learning

---------- Forwarded message - From: c b Date: Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 4:48 PM Subject: Theory of the structure of symbols and transgenerational teaching/learning Christopher , Here's another brief statement of my theory of the origin of the human symbol as a means of teaching future generations without direct imitation. We don't have to reinvent the wheel. A smart chimp might invent the wheel, but would have difficulty passing it on to future generations. Charles http://lists.econ.utah.edu/pipermail/marxism-thaxis/2008-June/022333.html CB : See also http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2017/09/symbolic-inheritance.html?m=1 ///// http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2021/05/culturally-inherited-adaptations-give.html /// http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2020/12/differentia-specifica-of-human-species.html ^^^ CB: The principle of the arbitrariness of the sign or in English, the symbol, is not only from structuralism. Leslie White, a founder of a main school of anthropology also articulated this principle. And symbols in this sense are a main characteristic of culture ( that which socially constructs , to put it in terms of a frequent refrain on this list.) as well as language. Both culture and language are systems of symbols (signs). And , importantly, the human species is defined by its possession of culture or custom or tradition. No other species has language or culture. So, signing or symboling , in the forms of both language and culture, is our species defining activity. And, importantly , also, most of human _learning_ is through symbols, culture, _not_ by imitating, like other species. Not by "monkey-see, monkey do" imitation. Most of our learning ( as opposed to inborn or genetically based knowledge) is through culture, not from experience. And cultural learning is learning from the experience of other people, including learning from people who are now dead. Just to further explain the concept of arbitrariness, it refers to the relationship between the signifier and the signified. So, if the sounds d-o-g are used to refer to things that are dogs, we see that those sounds do not "imitate" or are not naturally related to dogs. The arbitrariness of a sign refers to the fact that in a sign something is used to represent something that it is not. Two _different_ things are arbitrarily identified, treated as the _same_. Note that this is a unity or identity of opposites of the dialectic. So, culture or human social "constructivity" consists in an enormous system of signs or symbols. I have theorized that the reason culture became our unique characteristic is that once some homind discovered them way, way back when, they were highly adaptive because they allowed past generations to pass on their experience to future generations across the "death barrier" . Why ? Because a symbol represents something by something it is not ( the arbitrary relation between signifier and signified) So, a living generation can learn from a symbol about the experience of dead generations, when it could not learn from imitating the dead, since the dead aren't able to demonstrate things to be learned, obviously, because they are dead. But since a symbol uses something, a signifier, to represent something that it is not, the signified, because of this _arbitrary_ ( non-imitative) relation, the dead ancestor's "demonstration" can be learned by the living descendent through the signifier, through the thing (word or cultural object) that is _not_ the dead ancestor. Cultural learning allows us to learn from the experience of many, many...many of our ancestors. This was its main adaptive advantage when our species originated in founding culture. Culture also allowed learning more from other living members of the species. Human children could learn a lot more from their parents than other species, who were restricted to teaching their young by demonstration and imitation. Other species have to "give a picture" or demonstration of what they are teaching. That a signifier is not what it signifies means it communicates by a non-picture or non-imitation of what it represents. You heard it here first (smile) http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2021/05/culturally-inherited-adaptations-give.html

Differentia specifica of human species is symbolic communication and behavior - language and culture .

Differentia specifica of human species is symbolic communication and behavior - language and culture .

BY CHARLES BROWN

I write here a dialectical critique of Engels’ essay “The Role of Labour in the Transition from Ape to Man” in part based on Marx’s claim that human labor is differentiated from all other species “ labor by the role of imagination “! ( (https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch07.htm ) Otherwise , in his anthropological _The Origin of the Family , Private Property and the State _ , Engels is profoundly correct on the difference between the Stone Age and Civilization and other issues.

My critique of Engels on this point is informed by the current biological ( human evolution) and cultural anthropological facts on origin of tool use , stone tool use ; and the nature of language and culture as SYMBOLIC communication and behavior . Origin of tool use and origin of language and culture is the issue Engels speculates concerning in “The Role of Labour in the transition from Ape to Man“. My basic difference with him is that language and culture allowed the invention of labor with Stone tools created by imagination; not labor created language and culture ( symbolic communication and behavior ; see definition of symbolic signs below ) ; I plead not guilty to the charge of philosophical idealism -smiles .

The origin of humans is the origin of language and culture , NOT the origin of bipedalism and hands freed from walking on all fours . ( see pre-human , habitually bipedal primates https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australopithecine) 

“Engels never finished Dialectics of Nature. Haldane, in his preface to the 1939 publication of Dialectics of Nature, regrets that it remained unpublished for a long time, and writes, “Had his remarks on Darwinism been generally known, I for one would have been saved a certain amount of muddled thinking.” One of its unfinished fragments is on the role of labor in human evolution, more specifically the evolution of the hand. It is the evolution of the hand through the process of labor—creating tools—that distinguishes humans from apes. Engels writes, “Thus the hand is not only the organ of labour, it is also the product of labour.” It is not the evolution of the hand that led to our evolution as a species but the coevolution of the hand and labor as a historical process.”

The bottomline of my critique in the blog below is : Language and culture , symbolic communication and symbolically guided behavior, originate 2.5 million years ago and enable homo habilis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_habilis) to make the first Stone tools . ( THE ORIGIN OF HUMANS IS IN THE ORIGIN OF LANGUAGE AND CULTURE , SYMBOLIC COMMUNICATION AND BEHAVIOR) It is NOT that the ancestral bipedal species (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australopithecine)

to homo habilis started using its hands ( freed by bipedalism ; standing on two feet instead of four freeing the hands ) and that caused them to start symbolic communication and behavior as Engels speculates . ( this is not idealist philosophical error on my part ; I will explain why not below)

Here is Engels’ essay

The Part played by Labour in the Transition from Ape to Man

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1876/part-played-labour/index.htm

The following is my blog item critiquing Engels‘ essay.

http://take10charles.blogspot.com/2017/02/more-leisure-is-homo-sapiens-species.html

More Leisure is Homo sapiens species essence ; May Day demand

More Leisure ( than our ancestral primate species had) is our species essence ( See "The Original Affluent Society" by my anthropological mentor and senior anthro major advisor ,Marshall Sahlins , in _Stone Age Economics_ ) . Foraging is a mode of direct appropriation from nature , not a mode of production; making a living by gigging smart not working hard. It was not that bi-pedalism and the origin of hands originated a new labor that caused the invention of tradition , names and words . The invention of culture and language in childcare by mothers ( I’m saying mothers invented names , words , symbolic communication to improve childcare, reproductive labor ) was extended to making a living ( the Darwinian struggle for existence) ; language and culture revolutionized the human struggle for existence by making it smarter, wiser, because of accumulation of knowledge over many generations . Language gives humans the capacity for dead generations to leave communications about their experiences to future living generations) . Also More leisure gives more time to think and thereby work even smarter.

Symbolic communication allows :

Ancestor veneration

The difference between humans and all other species is that through symbolic communication , words and culture, dead generations have a certain immortality and are part of the society of living generations . Living generations share the experiences of dead generations . Thereby knowledge accumulates. All humans stand on the shoulders of giants , as the scientist Issac Newton put it concerning his scientific ancestors .

Engels is wrong in "The Role of Labor in the Transition from Ape to Man" when he says "First labour, after it and then with it speech ..." CB : First long childcare , then names and speech invented by mothers to do better childcare , and then a transition to LESS toil in the struggle for existence , to smarter struggle for existence informed by ancestral experience , and more leisure as compared with primate species ancestral to homo habilis and the origin of the Stone Age . Stone tools were invented to allow making a living less toilsome and more efficient .

Perhaps the topic would be better named the transition in the struggle for existence in the transition from ape to man : the origin of imagination.

Stone Age society is Societas ( anthropologist Lewis Henry Morgan’s term in _Ancient Society_ ) beginning 2.5 million years ago ; to circa 6,000 years ago with the beginning of Civitas ( Morgan ) private property, greed , slavery and heavy labor ( as Engels teaches in _The Origin of the Family , Private Property and the State _ ) . Slavery is the origin of Hard work , work ethic. With so-called civilization, hard work ethic comes to dominate cultural ideas . So, hard labour is not our Stone Age, species-being , but civilization-being, which is a small fraction of the full time of our species history.

I think Engels anachronistically projects the determining role of labor on ideas ( the historical materialist principle ) back onto the Stone Age origins of language and culture . In fact the invention of language and culture revolutionized the bipedal primates’ struggle for existence by making it less of a struggle . Toilsome struggle was introduced with _slave_ labor in so-called civilization where historical materialist determination originates.

Nonetheless , Marx and Engels do propose transition from the Kingdom of Necessity to the Kingdom of Freedom . Freedom is Leisure and smart work through technology . Jobs lost to technological invention should be translated into more leisure time for the masses, a May Day demand.

[Marxism-Thaxis] The Part played by Labour in the Transition from Ape to Man c b Thu, 27 May 2010 05:54:49 -0700

What about the transition in labor in the transition from ape to man ? This essay uses "labor" in the sense that it is something that apes do; it is their struggle for existence , for survival in the Darwinian sense . So, it is not the same "labor" ( or is it work ?) that produces capitalist surplus value in _Capital_I, but the “labor “ more general to all animals that Marx describes in Chapter so and so , where he says the difference between the labor of spiders and bees and that of man is imagining the project as a plan first ( this implies that spiders and bees labor).

“en social conditions. Labour is, in the first place, a process in which both man and Nature participate, and in which man of his own accord starts, regulates, and controls the material re-actions between himself and Nature. He opposes himself to Nature as one of her own forces, setting in motion arms and legs, head and hands, the natural forces of his body, in order to appropriate Nature’s productions in a form adapted to his own wants. By thus acting on the external world and changing it, he at the same time changes his own nature. He develops his slumbering powers and compels them to act in obedience to his sway. We are not now dealing with those primitive instinctive forms of labour that remind us of the mere animal. An immeasurable interval of time separates the state of things in which a man brings his labour-power to market for sale as a commodity, from that state in which human labour was still in its first instinctive stage. We pre-suppose labour in a form that stamps it as exclusively human. A spider conducts operations that resemble those of a weaver, and a bee puts to shame many an architect in the construction of her cells. But what distinguishes the worst architect from the best of bees is this, that the architect raises his structure in imagination before he erects it in reality. At the end of every labour-process, we get a result that already existed in the imagination of the labourer at its commencement. He not only effects a change of form in the material on which he works, but he also realises a purpose of his own that gives the law to his modus operandi, and to which he must subordinate his will. And this subordination is no mere momentary act. Besides the exertion of the bodily organs, the process demands that, during the whole operation, the workman’s will be steadily in consonance with his purpose. This means close attention. The less he is attracted by the nature of the work, and the mode in which it is carried on, and the less, therefore, he enjoys it as something which gives play to his bodily and mental powers, the more close his attention is forced to be.”

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch07.htm

So, Marx’s implication ( contra Engels in “The Role of Labor “ ) is that in the transition from ape to man, labor transitioned in part by taking on more mental labor, imagination and planning , as a component. Imagination is a form of symbolic thinking . Symbolic thinking defines humans , differentiates humans from all other species despite the false and exaggerated claims for chimps and gorillas by some primatologists

[Marxism-Thaxis] The Part played by Labour in the Transition from Ape to Man c b Thu, 27 May 2010 13:32:42 -0700 Engels: “But the decisive step had been taken, the hand had become free and could henceforth attain ever greater dexterity; the greater flexibility thus acquired was inherited and increased from generation to generation.”

^^^^^ CB: Ahhh but how ? How did the experience of repetition of use of _a_ hand by one individual get transferred to the brains of the next generation and the next , become the experience of _The_ hand ? If Patriarch uses his hands thousands of times his increasing dexterity is based on accumulated experience in that one individual's brain. The next generation's brains go back to "square one" at birth and childhood . The only way to accumulate the knowledge across generations is by mediating the learning experience with language, imagination, symbolic communication The only way to "stand on the shoulders of giants" is to receive messages from them through a system of symbols, words . ( as in those days there wasn't the technology to take enough pictures) "The" hand is not the hand of an individual, but The Hand, as a concept, an organ of the species.

( Symbolic signs - words being the best example - have an _arbitrary_ relation between the sign and the thing signified . They are using something to represent something that they are not.

In my class , I write my name on the board -Charles Brown . Then I point out that the marks on the board are not me; but they are used to represent me. So a name is using something to represent something it is not . There is an arbitrary relation between a name and the person named .

The opposite of a symbolic sign is an _indexical_ sign . There is a necessary ( not arbitrary ) relationship between the sign and the thing signified . A favorite example is smoke and fire . Smoke is an indexical sign of fire .

Only humans have symbolic signs . Humans and all other animals communicate or read indexical signs ; humans have both -despite the exaggerated claims for chimps and gorillas by some animals rights primatologists.

Symbolic and indexical signs are basic ideas of semiotics .( http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/daniel/Documents/S4B/)

The arbitrary relation between symbolic signs and thing signified gives humans a DISPLACEMENT capacity . Humans can communicate with each other about events that are not in their immediate sensory field , like things that happened a week ago , or things that are on the other side of town

See https://owlcation.com/stem/The-difference-between-animal-and-human-communication

I CLAIM TO HAVE DISCOVERED BY LOGICAL IMPLICATION THAT THE UNIQUE DISPLACEMENT CAPACITY OF HUMANS ALLOWS ACCUMULATION OF KNOWLEDGE OVER GENERATIONS BECAUSE A LIVING GENERATION CAN SHARE THE EXPERIENCE OF DEAD GENERATIONS , SHARE _DISPLACED_ EXPERIENCES .

Therefore , it was the ability to experience the displaced experiences of dead generations, symbolic thinking , that allowed the first humans to make Stone tools ( reverse of Engels’ idea)

Again , Symbolic communication allows :

Ancestor veneration

The difference between humans and all other species is that through symbolic communication , words and culture, dead generations have a certain immortality and are part of the society of living generations . Living generations share the experiences of dead generations . Thereby knowledge accumulates. All humans stand on the shoulders of giants , as the scientist Issac Newton put it concerning his scientific ancestors .