Consensus is growing, in many areas of the humanities and social sciences, that aspects of the material world we live in have causal efficacy on our minds – the major dynamic being the plasticity of the brain linked to the affordances of our bodily engagements with things. The implications of that on how we approach and understand important mental health issues have not been adequately addressed. This paper proposes a material engagement approach to the study of the processes by which different forms of materiality achieve their effects. Focusing on the example of dementia, I propose that a collaboration between archaeology, anthropology, philosophy and psychiatry could help us to fill this gap in our knowledge, allowing us to understand the exact effects of everyday objects, personal possessions and forms of material engagement on people with dementia.

Bullot & Reber (B&R) begin asking if the study of the mind's inner life can provide a foundation for a science of art. Clearly there are many epistemological problems involved in the study of the cognitive and affective basis of art appreciation. I argue that context is key. I also propose that as long as the “mind's life” continues to be perceived as an “inner” intracranial phenomenon, little progress can be made. Mind and art are one.

I agree with Vaesen that it is a mistake to discard tool use as a hallmark of human cognition. I contend, nonetheless, that tools are not simply external markers of a distinctive human mental architecture. Rather, they actively and meaningfully participate in the process by which hominin brains and bodies make up their sapient minds.

Recent breakthroughs in the cognitive and brain sciences, most importantly developments in neuroimaging technologies including functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), positron emission tomography (PET), event-related potential (ERP), and magnetoencephalography (MEG), have opened a new window on the human mind and offered a whole new set of possibilities for exploring its hidden functional architecture. This growing analytic potential can also be seen reflected in the numerous new fields of research, ranging from neuroethics and neuroprosthetics to the latest emerging field of neuroeconomics, which each year are being added to the rapidly expanding domain of contemporary cognitive and brain sciences. Despite these important developments however, within archaeology there has been little awareness of the challenging questions constantly arising from current findings in this field. With a few recent exceptions in the areas of cognitive archaeology and evolutionary neuroscience (e.g. Stout et al. 2000; Stout & Chaminade 2007; Dehaene et al. 2005; Frey 2003; 2004; 2008; Bruner 2003; 2004; Gibson 1993; Wynn & Coolidge 2003; 2004; Coolidge & Wynn 2004; 2005; Deacon 1997; Hodgson & Helvenston 2006; Mithen 2005), no systematic attempt has been made to channel this huge emerging potential in the direction of a common integrated research program targeting the big picture of human cognitive evolution (both before and most importantly after the socalled speciation phase) (but see Renfrew et al. 2008). Although archaeologists do not excavate neural tissue, we should bear in mind that the development of functional neuroimaging has allowed the investigation of a whole new set of questions which raise a host of archaeological and anthropological issues and thus demand our attention and critical evaluation.

In this article I employ the example of the ‘Blind Man's stick’ (BMS) in order to redraw the traditional boundaries that separate brains, bodies and things. It is argued that the functional anatomy of the human brain is a dynamic bio-cultural construct subject to continuous ontogenetic and phylogenetic remodelling by behaviourally important and socially embedded experiences. These experiences are mediated and sometimes constituted by the use of material objects and artefacts (like the stick) which for that reason should be seen as continuous and active parts of the human cognitive architecture. Based on the above premises I use the example of the Blombos shell beads in order to explore the role of early body decoration in the emergence of human self awareness.