reply to post by ANOK
I think you need to readjust some preconceptions in order to understand me clearly. No discourtesy intended; keep reading and perhaps you will see
what I mean.
Originally posted by Astyanax
The environments we live in now are largely artificial, no question. However, an artificial environment exerts selective pressure on its occupants
just as surely as a natural one does.
Originally posted by ANOK
Hmmm if something is done by social engineering, conditioning, I don't consider that natural. Because it would not happen naturally.
Everybody lives in an artificial structure of some kind, works in an artificial environment such as a field, a mine, a factory or an office, and more
often than not passes the bulk of his or her leisure time in yet another artificial environment. I speak of yurts and skyscrapers, monasteries and
football fields, transcontinental highways and jungle eco-resorts, wheat farms and apple orchards. In short, the entire human world.
Although the individual components of these environments are designed, and attempts are often made (especially in institutional environments) to
create and maintain buildings and such-like in a rigidly pristine state, the vast majority of human environments are modified, customised, damaged,
etc., over time according to no conscious, single plan. Even planned environments are added to and modified over time by their users, often in ways
that alter them until their original designers would barely recognise them.
None of this has anything to do with social engineering. It is the opposite of social engineering. It happens naturally, and the final results are not
planned by any authority – they are the sum total of many people's plans, inspirations, whims and errors. And turn and turn about, they influence
the evolution of their creators.
Creators of the environment? To whom do you refer?
This should be clear to you after reading the above. I refer to all of us. Homo faber
. We create the environments in which we live. It's what
our species does – just like beavers, bowerbirds, corals and termites.
Artificial conditioning is not natural selection. An example that is natural Human evolution is our physical size, we are much taller, on average,
than we were even one hundred years ago.
As must now be evident, I am not talking about any kind of premeditated conditioning.
By the way, the increase in human height over the last few generations has nothing at all to do with evolution – it is not the result of genetic
variation but simply of better nutrition and health care in childhood. Examples of recent human evolution are the appearance of lactose tolerance in
cattle-herding populations about 4,000 years ago, and the sickle-cell adaptation that protects some people from malaria at the cost of making them
If you study a little history it becomes obvious they were smarter than us in general, without that 'junk science'.
I have written and published many historical articles and even a history book. And I'm pretty well up on the 1800s, particularly the latter half of
the century. I find absolutely no evidence to suggest that people then – or at any other time in the past – were more intelligent than we are.
Rather, I see plenty to convince me that they were just like us, and not only with respect to intelligence. Human nature doesn't change.
edit on 23/5/13 by Astyanax because: of an important sentence I left out.