My answer to the Sapient Paradox
The general theory seems coherent, but the only reason to shoehorn Eve into it is Genesis. The Bible isn't particularly old, and Eve seems even less likely when considering Indian or Sumerian myths.
What are the reasons to assume there was *one* transition - language, consciousness, recursion, selfhood, theory of mind, "unicameralism", whatever else, all a package deal? Can we easily discard the possibility that (for instance) language and the gods arose 12000 BC, and then theory of mind and "unicameralism", and the gods died out, 1200 BC? And maybe something happened 50000 BC as well, to produce the diagonal lines in the rock. (Furthermore, ought we suppose the transition or transitions were necessarily *discrete*?)
More likely, consciousness is related to Openness/Intellect/Imagination, as that's the factor most clearly and obviously involved with thought, reflection, and engagement with philosophy, emotion, and the human experience. Arthropods behave prosocially and even self-sacrificially; no consciousness is necessary for Agreeableness/Alpha.
"Indeed, applied to history it has essentially zero predictive power."
"If you say it affected language, then show me the language family it founded."
"We would see a phase change in creativity, planning, and searching for meaning."
We did -ancient Greece, India, Persia, and Judah (all with bad writing directions) and China (with a good writing direction, but oracle bones are fundamentally socdemmy rather than orcish). Orcs are not bad at trig!
I'll stick with Dennett's vastly more sensible explanation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZefk4gzQt4