This entry departs from promissory imaginaries about educational technology to show how postdigital research adopts a critical stance on futures. Futures are observed as both a research object and a methodological frame to understand an increasingly complex and technology-dense reality. Temporalities are identified as follows: futures in the present, near futures, far futures, and alternative futures. These situated time-spaces cater for different methodological approaches. Anticipatory methods are elaborated in relation to a near future, while far futures can be grasped through speculatively methods. Alternative futures are usually formulated in the literary vein of science fiction. The tendency in recent futures studies is to make explicit dimensions of ethics, care, and values in the crafting of educational futures.

Noam Chomsky (2005) proposed that a ‘third factor’, consisting of general principles and natural laws, may explain core properties of language in a principled manner, minimizing the need for either genetic endowment or experience. But the focus on third-factor patterns in much recent bio-linguistic work is misguided for several reasons: First, ‘the’ third factor is a vague and disparate collection of unrelated components, useless as an analytical tool. Second, the vagueness of the third factor, together with the desire for principled explanations, too often leads to sweeping claims, such as syntax “coming for free, directly from physics”, that are unwarranted without a case-by-case causal analysis. Third, attention is diverted away from a proper causal analysis of language as a biological feature. The point with biolinguistics is to acknowledge the language faculty as a biological feature. The best way forward towards an understanding of language is to take the biology connection seriously, instead of dabbling with physics.

Did Neanderthals have language? This issue has been debated back and forth for decades, without resolution. But in recent years new evidence has become available. New fossils and archeological finds cast light on relevant Neanderthal anatomy and behavior. New DNA evidence, both fossil and modern, provides clues both to the relationship between Neanderthals and Homo sapiens, and to the genetics of language. In this paper, I review and evaluate the available evidence. My conclusion is that the preponderance of the evidence supports the presence of some form of language in Neanderthals.

Did Neanderthals have language? This issue has been debated back and forth for decades,without resolution. But in recent years new evidence has become available. New fossils andarchaeological finds cast light on relevant Neanderthal anatomy and behaviour. New DNA evidence,both fossil and modern, provides clues both to the relationship between Neanderthals andHomo sapiens, and to the genetics of language. In this paper, I review and evaluate the availableevidence. My conclusion is that the preponderance of the evidence supports the presenceof some form of language in Neanderthals.