Why is man homo sapiens sapiens? Why the two sapiens?

Answer 1

It's the distinction between archaic homo sapiens and modern homo sapiens.

Archaics were not modern behaviorally, they produced the same kinds of tools and leavings as the other hominids they were contemporary with. They had heavier brow ridges and more robust skeletons.

Behaviorally modern humans, like us, produced cave art, more sophisticated tools and ornamental items that demonstrate a surpassing development in the capacity for abstract thought. Physically we have higher cranial vaults and more gracile skeletons.

Answer 2

All living human beings belong to the single
species Homo sapiens. Any species of organism is designated by just two words, as in
this case. When there are three or more words
in the name something other than an entire single species is being designated. A three-word
name is a subspecies. A subspecies is a part
of a species population which occurs in a given
geographical part of the total species range and
is different in some way from the rest of the
population of the species.

In humans two different things have been given
subspecies designations - the extinct relatives
of living humans, such as Neanderthal man, and
the various races of living humans, Homo sapiens sapiens being the Caucasian race. It
is still being disputed whether Neanderthal man
was the "same" species as living humans or not.
If not, then it would be Homo neanderthalensis,
not Homo sapiens neanderthalensis. The naming of subspecies has been carried much too far in some living organisms, and some
scientists have recommended that the practice
of naming them should be abandoned. Usually
the characteristic traits which supposedly
distinguish the subspecies represent such a
very small part of the species' variability that
they are of little significance. Human races, for
example, are based on little more than skin color
and hair type.

In plant taxonomy naming of the organisms has
been carried to such an extreme that special
names have been given to what are nothing but
single-gene differences, giving rise to names for
what are called forms of varieties of subspecies.
This requires a five word name. This is as
though a different scientific name were applied
to an albino individual of a normally pigmented
species.

Answer 3

Classification can be confusing; it derives from an effort to standardize the various names that things were called all over the world. The basic idea is to group things together based on certain characteristics and then separate them into smaller and smaller categories of more closely related groups. The classical form is "Kings Play Chess On Funny Green Squares", ie Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, Species. So we humans would be classified under Kingdom Animalia (the animals; not plants, protists, fungi, and whatever new kingdom classifications there may be)/ Phylum Chordata (animals with spinal cords)/ Class Mammalia (not fish or birds or etc.)/ Order Primata (spelling?) (the primates - "highest mammals")/ Family Hominidae (the hominids - human-like primates)/ Genus Homo (truly "human" hominids)/ species sapiens (="thinking")/ sub-species sapiens (because sometimes 'species' isn't specific enough, and groups like Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon need to be further differentiated from us). See, the trouble is, classical classification can be a pain - it's not always easy to fit things into the 'standard' groups, so you end up shoe-horning things into "sub-" groups like sub-Phylum, sub-Class, etc. as you discover new things that don't quite fit. Needless to say, this leaves you with a very messy and complicated "family tree" sometimes. That's why alternate and supposedly simpler methods of classification are periodically proposed, of which the best so far has been the cladistic method (do a Google if you're interested).
Anyway, the simple answer is the first "sapiens" refers to the species; the second "sapiens" refers to the sub-species. We won't get into sub-sub-species or races or any of that other mush here; it gets too messy.

Answer 4

Homo sapiens is Latin for 'man having sense', 'the wise
human' or 'the clever human'. Neandertals, who were
more advanced than apes, were classified under species
Homo sapiens. They are also called by the name Archaic
Homo sapiens. Modern humans are classified under
subspecies of Homo sapiens. Hence they are called Homo
sapiens sapiens. They are also called by the name
Modern Homo sapiens.

http://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Homo_sapiens_sapiens
http://www.wsu.edu:8001/vwsu/gened/learn-modules/top_longfor/timeline/h-sapiens-sapiens/h-sapiens-sapiens-a.html
http://www.answers.com/topic/human
http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo2/mod_homo_4.htm
http://www.roperld.com/HomoSapienEvents.htm

Answer 5

Becuase our predecesors were Homo sapiens neandertalensis (smart neanderthal man) and Homo sapiens cromagnon (smart cromagnon man). We are smart smart man.

It doesn't make any sense at all if it's not in latin, I guess.

Answer 6

I think that they use the plural form to encompass all of man kind. Not to confuse you :D