It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Civilization And Savages

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 09:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Aristotelian1

It could be down to contact with others as well as conflict.

Contact through trade etc brings different view points and exposure to radical ideas.

Conflict drives innovation through the need to overcome your enemy's innovations in offensive and defensive methods and technology.

So if you can trade widely with independent sometimes hostile cultures it probably brings the best of all worlds to yours as a result.
edit on 39pThu, 09 Jun 2016 09:07:39 -050020162016-06-09T09:07:39-05:00kAmerica/Chicago30000000k by SprocketUK because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
Technology is not a display of intelligence. Its more of a display of hubris. A desire to conquer nature rather than live within it.


Remember, that "living within nature" and "not using technology" is not the act of all species. Birds use tools. So do chimps and many others. Although there's a romantic notion of "noble savage/living in harmony with the land", the truth is that the land has never lived in harmony with us.

So we have the choice to be a victim of our fates or to overcome it.

Think of how the land would look if we all lived like Tarzan... in groups of a million or more (as we do in cities today.) No farms to feed us, no plumbing, no fossil fuels to cook and heat homes...



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 11:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Byrd

Im not sure mazlow would allow for a people to swell in numbers without agrarian culture to support it.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 03:43 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Uhmmm, No
Mammoth chasing was only relevant to our AMH ancestors for a fairly short time , only for about 35-40k years and only for northern populations..
Shellfish gathering supported a much larger population over a much wider range, and goes back to the dawn of the genus homo.
Even Clovis, who's popular image is that of mammoth hunters, hunted much larger variety of animal, with mammoth making up a relatively small percentage of the diet, they only seem to be mammoth specialists because a mammoth kill site is big and intrusive upon the landscape.
In fact in the "hone lands" of Clovis, they are far more turtle than mammoth, and in the northern plains, why h would have been mammoth territory, they hunted almost exclusively horse.
And the popular notion that Native Americans and other societies, along the same lines, "Lived in Harmony with Nature" is BS..
They actively changed the landscape to suit their needs. They cut down and burned out woodlands for agriculture. After the YD( which depressed populations) they hunted many animals to extinction, just as in Australia, and just like island west Pacific.
The main impetuous for moving down the west coast of NA, was the depletion on shellfish beds.

In primative societies opulation density is the main driver of progression.

The main reason Eurasia seems to have had an advantage was geography and climate.
The Eurasian land mass is more conducive to the spread of ideas, and it's relatively mild and consistent climate allowed early people to exchange ideas and goods over a much larger area than any where else in the world.


Byrd, I think Collapse is a much better book than GGS, and has a more solid theoretical basis.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 03:58 PM
link   
a reply to: punkinworks10

I used the mammoth as an avatar for "megafauna". the resources you could extract from a large beast was immense.

When I was referring to this, i tried to be clear that the mammoth hunting was more for once we left africa and the levant.

ETA: on a side note to this, and off topic...what are the chances that proto indo europeans made attempts to domesticate the mammoth?
edit on 6/9/2016 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Sure,

But we were out of Africa, the levant for nearly 50k years before we started hunting mammoth, as a lifestyle.
In fact mammoth hunting excellently illustrates my assertion that H/G peoples "live in harmony" with nature, is not the case.If it was the mammoth would have survived much longer, as it did on Wrangel and The Channel islands. There were easier things to hunt, so the pressure was taken off the pachyderms.
It is an extremley wasteful endevour. Much of the meat would have gone waste, you would have been able to preserve it all, and what you did preserve, drying or smoking, mabey salting,much would still have spoiled before you could consume it.

And BTW BFFT, my post wasn't aimed at you, so much as the popular notion that the paleolithic lifestyle is all unicorns and rainbows.

I have friends that go on and on about the "paleolithic diet" and have no idea what it means to actually try to survive in such circumstances.
My favorite two examples I use to gross them out are, the Native Central Californian practice of catching grasshoppers, chipmunks, voles, lizards, frogs berries and small fish, throwing them whole into your grind hole in the granite, and pounding them to a mush, then cooking it on an ash covered hot rock. Imagine how tasty that would be, with shells, bone and skins all.
The other is the practice the people of the basin and range took up at the onset of the YD. During the arid and cool YD, these people whom had been living a lake side lifestyle, eating reeds, snails, molluscs, but strangley little water fowl, started wandering in the new desert gathering seeds, which they would cache in caves. Since the seeds were seasonal and had a limited range, they became very mobile. At cache sites, during the season, they would dig a big pit in the cave and crap into it. Then as the seed season passed they would come back and sort the undigested seeds out of their crap and eat them again, life was freaking hard.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 05:00 PM
link   
a reply to: punkinworks10

what a fantastic story!

i like the notion of a paleo diet...but its too fad driven. i think that grains are not meant for all people (me being one of them), but if you do poorly with grains you will do poorly with nectar fruits, too.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

An old chap brought up something I found interesting to ponder (still want to look into this): he reckons one of the reasons humans in the northern latitudes, advanced as they did was because they had to form tight knit groups. Smaller tribes. Which gave more focus, to food, tools, planning ahead, etc. Where in the southern climes, although life wasn't easy, tribes were larger, and more nomadic, leading to more battles over land/resources and less time to focus. Culture and advancement influenced by environment and all that. ...okay, not as cut and dried as that, but the gist is there.

Every region of the globe and the culture/people that populate it are examples of how civilizations can thrive or struggle, also depends on the eye of the beholder.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Jimjolnir

Sounds interesting. I've never really looked into it much, but certainly seems like a possibility.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 06:34 PM
link   
It can't be environment. Africa's potential arable land is over 3 million square kilometers. In 2011 the United States had 1,602,000 square kilometers of used farmland. The United States is considered the world's bread basket. Yet Africa has twice as much possible farmland. If humans started in Africa, why is it the least developed continent in the world, and the source of so much starvation and misery?

It can't be warfare. African tribes have been fighting each other for thousands of years. As long as there has been recorded history, there has been a slave trade with Europeans purchasing slaves from African tribes. Contrary to popular belief, the Europeans didn't invade Africa and slave them up by force - it was easier and more profitable to purchase captives that one tribe took from another tribe. To this day there is tribal warfare in Africa.

So in other parts of the world, starvation pushes one culture to develop new means to feed their people where as in Africa they either give up and starve to death, or resort to cannibalism to survive. In other parts of the world, warfare drives the development of new weapons and technology, where as in Africa they were using rocks and pointy sticks until Europeans sold them better weapons (leading to events like the Rwandan genocide where machetes were used to kill 1 million Africans in a tribal war).

IMO part of it may be intelligence, but I think a huge driving factor is religion. Christianity in particular unified Europe under a consolidated belief system and common moral code, it improved literacy through study of the scriptures, it gave rise to a new social class - the clergy, who dedicated their lives to scholarly pursuits such as reading, writing, history, mathematics, what have you (even metallurgy - look up Ulfberht swords). It gave rise to the printing press (developed to print Bibles faster) which started the Renaissance.

Michio Kaku says that where you find the internet, you find prosperity. I say where you find the free practice of Christianity, you will find prosperity and the internet. The higher moral code and cultural tolerance that Christianity brings to a people allows their society to develop faster.

Also it's a fact that our education system has grown worse than it was in the past. United States high school graduates seem more ignorant than ever before, and routinely score less on tests compared to students studying the same material in other countries. It should come as no surprise, that in the past when our graduates were more learned and knowledgeable they were using McGuffery Readers in school that had Bible verses in them? They stopped using these in 1925 and it seems that shortly after removing Christianity from our public schools and switching to secular textbooks, that each new generation has been stupider than the last. The WW2 generation would have been the last generation to use McGuffery Readers, and they are known as the greatest generation in history.

For the first time since Jesus, western countries are collectively starting to fall away from Christianity and become more secular as a whole. Right now for the first time in history, it seems all of Europe on the precipice of being wiped out and replaced by refugees who adhere to a much less tolerant and much less moral religion that won't allow these societies to develop much at all, and in fact will likely regress should they take over.

The United States already has an estimated 10 to 20 million illegal immigrants in it from Mexico and South America, but most of these immigrants are Catholic and are much more moral and tolerant than the islamic refugees are. Which is why most US citizens complain chiefly about the economic aspects of their presence here, and not their culture trying to wipe us out. In fact, many of us like Mexican culture and assimilate it into our own - taco bell, cinco de mayo, the legend of zoro, art, music, literature. While there are complaints they are much more accepted in the USA than the islamic refugees are in Europe, and the reason for that is Christianity.

Most of you aren't going to like this, and I will likely get trolled, but it is what it is.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: peskyhumans

Christianity argument doesn't work.

Look at the Asian countries who aren't Christian and some that never were.

ETA: Plus the age of Christianity couldn't account for advancement in pre Christian earth.
edit on 962016 by TerryDon79 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 08:04 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

It's hard to get an exact figure because China has a rather oppressive state-sponsered version of Christianity, and there is a increasing number of underground churches there today (which won't answer polls, by their very nature). But by some accounts there could be more Christians in China than in the United States within 15 years. Christianity is growing fast in China, regardless of the fact that the Communist Party doesn't particularly like it.

www.telegraph.co.uk...
www.cnn.com...

www.economist.com...

Japan also had as much as 25% of it's population Christian in the past. While it's a much smaller percentage today, Christianity is one of the most tolerated foreign religions in Japan because of the influence Christians have had in it's culture and Japan celebrates several Christian holidays (particularly Christmas, though it is not a national holiday). Christian weddings are an accepted alternative to Shinto weddings there. This level of acceptance in Japan is significant because they are very traditional and a bit cold when it comes to foreign ideas and ways of doing things.

29% of South Koreans are Christian, and Christianity is the largest religious group in South Korea (although there are more non-religious people in South Korea, at 46%)

www.pewresearch.org...

I think that covers the more advanced Asian countries. I'm not going to research North Korea or Vietnam, as they aren't particularly prosperous.

Thailand is just about the only exception to the rule, as they have a very small Christian population (about 1%) and a relatively high GDP (over 1 trillion). Thailand's national religion is Buddhism.

But that's one small country, versus China, Japan, and South Korea which either have increasing Christian populations or accept the free practice of Christianity.

*Also pre-Christian earth never got past the bronze age. If it wasn't for the Church, Europe might not have crawled out of the Dark Ages and developed civilization again. The Renaissance was driven by Christianity and had global impact.
edit on 6/9/16 by peskyhumans because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 11:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: punkinworks10

I used the mammoth as an avatar for "megafauna". the resources you could extract from a large beast was immense.

When I was referring to this, i tried to be clear that the mammoth hunting was more for once we left africa and the levant.

ETA: on a side note to this, and off topic...what are the chances that proto indo europeans made attempts to domesticate the mammoth?


Megafauna were notoriously difficult and dangerous to hunt and often not worth the effort. Turtles are plentiful, don't need that much stalking, and aren't likely to stomp you to death. There's evidence (pry marks, etc) that our ancestors scavenged them when needed.)

Megafauna are also not very productive. It takes only 2 months for a chick to become a full grown chicken... but it takes elephants (and presumably mammoths) 10-14 years to mature. Elephant pregnancies are long (more than a year) and produce only a single calf at a time. This is true of all large animals that I can think of.

On the other hand, small animals (mice, rats, birds, insects, fish, shellfish) have multiple offspring in each birthing and their offspring grow quickly. Any group that specialized in hunting megafauna would be out of dinner within a few years.

As to the second question - there's no evidence of any attempts to domesticate large animals. They breed poorly in captivity (at least elephants don't breed well in captivity) and require a lot of food during their lengthy childhood.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 11:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: peskyhumans
Christianity in particular unified Europe under a consolidated belief system and common moral code, it improved literacy through study of the scriptures, it gave rise to a new social class - the clergy, who dedicated their lives to scholarly pursuits such as reading, writing, history, mathematics, what have you (even metallurgy - look up Ulfberht swords). It gave rise to the printing press (developed to print Bibles faster) which started the Renaissance.


I think you need to look at the data again.

Ancient Egyptians, Sumerians, Babylonians, Romans, Greeks, Chinese weren't Christian and some of them (Greeks, particularly but Roman engineers) made inventions and wrote books that still move the world today.

As to printing, the Sumerians invented that with their clay stamps and seals. The Chinese (200 AD) were the first to do three color press printing: en.wikipedia.org...

We are taught only the Westernized version of history, and only the bits that apply to our country... as a result, most folks are totally oblivious to real world history.



posted on Jun, 9 2016 @ 11:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: peskyhumans
*Also pre-Christian earth never got past the bronze age. If it wasn't for the Church, Europe might not have crawled out of the Dark Ages and developed civilization again. The Renaissance was driven by Christianity and had global impact.


Also not true. The Iron Age began in and around Anatolia in 1200 BC, long before the Bible was collated and long before the Hebrews were an ethnic identity: en.wikipedia.org...

Roman, Greek, Hindu, and Chinese technology led the world after Egypt and Sumeria declined. And Islamic scientists were making early robots and developed chemistry and mathematics -- their science flourished (and was ahead of Christian science) until about 1650 AD: museum.kaust.edu.sa...



posted on Jun, 10 2016 @ 06:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aristotelian1

originally posted by: Ericthedoubter
a reply to: Aristotelian1

People adapt to their environment.San Bushmen are superb at living and surviving in the Okovango delta.Londoners are superb at drinking warm, disgusting beer and complaining about cyclists.

Humans are supremely adaptable and we tend to cut out that which is unnecessary.

I think the more intelligent civilizations make their environment adapt to them. That's what separates modern day society from cavemen. Cavemen adapted to their environment, now we make the environment adapt to us.

Actually, making the environment adapt to "us" is a hallmark of the genus Homo.
It goes all the way back to H. Habilis.

There's not a whit of difference in intelligence between Early Modern Humans and ourselves.
No matter where on Earth you look.

More advanced cultures became that way through success. Success at population-building.
When the need to improve your methods for obtaining food (for example) arises (because of this success,) you either improve your technology or lots of people don't survive (less success at population-building.)

Harte



posted on Jun, 10 2016 @ 06:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: punkinworks10
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Uhmmm, No
Mammoth chasing was only relevant to our AMH ancestors for a fairly short time , only for about 35-40k years and only for northern populations..

Not to mention successful Mammoth-hunting involved advancements in hunting techniques and technologies.

Hunter-gatherer cultures also "advanced," IOW.

Harte



posted on Jun, 10 2016 @ 06:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: peskyhumans
Christianity in particular unified Europe under a consolidated belief system and common moral code, it improved literacy through study of the scriptures, it gave rise to a new social class - the clergy, who dedicated their lives to scholarly pursuits such as reading, writing, history, mathematics, what have you (even metallurgy - look up Ulfberht swords). It gave rise to the printing press (developed to print Bibles faster) which started the Renaissance.


I think you need to look at the data again.

Ancient Egyptians, Sumerians, Babylonians, Romans, Greeks, Chinese weren't Christian and some of them (Greeks, particularly but Roman engineers) made inventions and wrote books that still move the world today.

As to printing, the Sumerians invented that with their clay stamps and seals. The Chinese (200 AD) were the first to do three color press printing: en.wikipedia.org...

We are taught only the Westernized version of history, and only the bits that apply to our country... as a result, most folks are totally oblivious to real world history.

Also, the "cloistered monks figuring out mathematics" idea is hooie.
Best they did was recover mathematics already established millennia earlier, in the complete absence of Christianity.
In fact, if it hadn't been for Arabs, all of it might have been lost.
The Moors invaded and brought practically all the Mathematics Europe later possessed with them.
Moors weren't Christian.

The very word "algebra" is Arabic.

Harte



posted on Jun, 10 2016 @ 06:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: peskyhumans
Christianity in particular unified Europe under a consolidated belief system and common moral code, it improved literacy through study of the scriptures, it gave rise to a new social class - the clergy, who dedicated their lives to scholarly pursuits such as reading, writing, history, mathematics, what have you (even metallurgy - look up Ulfberht swords). It gave rise to the printing press (developed to print Bibles faster) which started the Renaissance.


I think you need to look at the data again.

Ancient Egyptians, Sumerians, Babylonians, Romans, Greeks, Chinese weren't Christian and some of them (Greeks, particularly but Roman engineers) made inventions and wrote books that still move the world today.

As to printing, the Sumerians invented that with their clay stamps and seals. The Chinese (200 AD) were the first to do three color press printing: en.wikipedia.org...

We are taught only the Westernized version of history, and only the bits that apply to our country... as a result, most folks are totally oblivious to real world history.


You mean like Aristotle? "Moving objects come to a stop because they grow tired"? The Greeks were off on a lot of things too.

Clay stamps and seals are not a printing press. The Chinese may have had movable type, but their presses didn't start the Printing Revolution. Gutenberg's printing press did.

The Printing Revolution

I see a general trend where nations that allow free practice of Christianity end up becoming more prosperous and advanced. The more they turn Christian, the more prosperous they become. Also the more they fall away, the less prosperous they become (like in the USA and Europe right now)

In some of the articles I linked in my first post, they speculate that within 15 years there will be more Christians in China than in the United States. That's significant because there are more than 240 million Christians in the USA and there are 88 million members of the Communist Party in China.

If that does happen, I predict the following:

1. If Christians outnumber Communists almost 3 to 1 in China and they gain political traction, China will become more prosperous and free than it is now. Possibly even more than the United States, which is right now becoming less Christian.
2. Under pressure by this new larger political block, the Great Firewall will come down. Giving potentially a billion more human beings full access to the internet.

If this does happen, what else would you contribute it to? Their intelligence? Do you think the Chinese will become more prosperous and free because their collective IQ will rise by 1 or 2 points?
edit on 6/10/16 by peskyhumans because: fix link

edit on 6/10/16 by peskyhumans because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2016 @ 07:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: peskyhumans

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: peskyhumans
Christianity in particular unified Europe under a consolidated belief system and common moral code, it improved literacy through study of the scriptures, it gave rise to a new social class - the clergy, who dedicated their lives to scholarly pursuits such as reading, writing, history, mathematics, what have you (even metallurgy - look up Ulfberht swords). It gave rise to the printing press (developed to print Bibles faster) which started the Renaissance.


I think you need to look at the data again.

Ancient Egyptians, Sumerians, Babylonians, Romans, Greeks, Chinese weren't Christian and some of them (Greeks, particularly but Roman engineers) made inventions and wrote books that still move the world today.

As to printing, the Sumerians invented that with their clay stamps and seals. The Chinese (200 AD) were the first to do three color press printing: en.wikipedia.org...

We are taught only the Westernized version of history, and only the bits that apply to our country... as a result, most folks are totally oblivious to real world history.


You mean like Aristotle? "Moving objects come to a stop because they grow tired"? The Greeks were off on a lot of things too.

Clay stamps and seals are not a printing press.

They were cylinders, rolled on clay slabs.
That's printing. The only difference is moveable type.
The press is an advancement on the idea. A machine to do it instead of doing it by hand.

Harte




top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join