Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 162

Thread: Are we better off than the prehistoric man?

  1. #101
    Educator / Liar Champion ab9924's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sharing time between UK and US.
    Last Seen
    11-19-12 @ 10:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    904

    Re: Are we better off than the prehistoric man?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    But most people are NOT homeless, and most people have NOT been raped by a streetgang. Perhaps you are spending too much time fretting over things that are really rather unlikely?



    Men have not magically become angels, no. However, to pretend that nothing has changed for the better is nonsense.

    Do some research into the Rennaisance. We have no conception of the daily threat of violence many people lived under in those days: vicious crime, oppressive rulers who could have you tortured on a whim, marauding bandits and mercenaries, the threat of war hanging over them every day, the perils of being conquered (pillage, rape and plunder were once great sports for the military), the joys of annual plagues and so on.

    In my studies about Elizabethan London, I learned that it was considered a mortal peril to try to travel in London much after dark. Persons of property who did so, did it with armed servants holding lit-match Arquebuses and lanterns on poles, and kept their swords and bucklers handy. Some scholars believe that many Rennaisance-era cities had more street crime and violence than any modern megapolis.


    I think you need to study a bit about primitive tribes from a more neutral and scholarly source. As I've said they were not, for the most part, angelic innocents. I'm part Native American and in the time I spent studying that part of my cultural heritage it became clear that "the Noble Savage" was largely myth. Further studies about Amazon and African tribes confirmed this thesis.
    This is interesting.

    But still, I must propose that it may be logical, that it is less stressful to the mind when you know that something will (almost) certainly happen if you go ahead with something, than when you know that you may or may not avoid something that may or may not destroy you. As per the OP, your analysis shows, that we may have traded physical uncertainty for mental uncertainty.

  2. #102
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,451
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Are we better off than the prehistoric man?

    Quote Originally Posted by ab9924 View Post
    I was thinking that what the prehistoric hordes shared between themselves, such as food, is in a way the same philosophy as government benefit programs trying to share with tax money.
    Things that work for nomadic bands don't work for sedentary tribes.

    The "natural communism" and social structures break down around 700 people, as this is the maximum number where everybody knows everybody else well enough for it to work.

    Everybody ate, but nobody just sat on their ass.

    That didnt start until we started locking up and doling out the food. And it wasnt the doled TO that were doing the sitting. That was the managers.
    Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
    The Psychology of Persuasion

  3. #103
    Black Is Smart
    Van Basten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    The New New Frontier
    Last Seen
    11-06-17 @ 07:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    4,661

    Re: Are we better off than the prehistoric man?

    What kind of question is this?

    Of course we are, by lightyears.
    "We have more responsibility than power, I think. The newspaper can create great controversies, stir up arguments within the community or discussion, can throw light on injustices....just as it can do the opposite. It can hide things and be a great power for evil." -- Rupert Murdoch, 1968

  4. #104
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,451
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Are we better off than the prehistoric man?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Look up the Yanomamo, also called the Yanomami. Primitive tribes in SAm jungles. Lots of warfare, feuds, murder, rapes, etc.


    Primitive does not equal virtuous.
    Its good to bear in mind though that human "ugliness" is almost always the result of hoatile environments/population pressure.

    Cultures that evolve where the livins easy tend to be pretty easy going.
    Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
    The Psychology of Persuasion

  5. #105
    Educator / Liar Champion ab9924's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sharing time between UK and US.
    Last Seen
    11-19-12 @ 10:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    904

    Re: Are we better off than the prehistoric man?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Do you know many people who have ACTUALLY had a street gang put a price on their head? I doubt it... so why carry on about it so much?



    This isn't a huge worry where I live, because we tend to shoot people who act like that around here.
    HAHAHAHA This is very good.

    Actually, my logic is that although I don't know any gang guys, if I totally mess up, I would be homeless, and then I would have to join a street gang like everyone else for survival, and then eventually either a fellow gang member, or an opponent gang, or the police would get my head. Isn't this true for everybody?

  6. #106
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,159

    Re: Are we better off than the prehistoric man?

    Quote Originally Posted by ab9924 View Post
    This is interesting.

    But still, I must propose that it may be logical, that it is less stressful to the mind when you know that something will (almost) certainly happen if you go ahead with something, than when you know that you may or may not avoid something that may or may not destroy you. As per the OP, your analysis shows, that we may have traded physical uncertainty for mental uncertainty.

    There are still some areas, in South America and Africa, where primitive tribes continue to pursue a hunter-gatherer lifestyle with little difference from Stone Age times.

    Perhaps you could go live with them for a few years. If you survive, you can come back and tell us all about how better it was than air-conditioning and modern medicine.

    Until you've had some experience of living this way, I consider your views likely to be romanticized, looking at the concept of primitive living through rose-colored glasses as it were.

    Have you ever spent a week in a wildnerness area, living off what you can carry in on your back? This is far easier than living a Stone Age lifestyle... and it can be fun for a while, but eventually it becomes a bit wearisome and you're ready to return to civilization.

    On several occasions, I have gone with my son and a large group of like-minded folk into an undeveloped area and built a temporary "village" in the middle of nowhere, with what we could haul in our vehicles or build on-site, then lived in it for up to a week.... then tore everything down and made it disappear like it had never existed. For the duration, we lived a little bit like a "tribe" of sorts... we cooked communal dinners and ate together, worked together, socialized together... had people who were in charge of security, of cooking and logistics, of sanitation, of water supply, etc etc. It was fun for a week or so... but after a while there are things about civilization you miss and you're about ready to go home.

    Still waiting for you to fill me in on all this wonderful social stuff about primitivism that I'm missing....

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  7. #107
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,159

    Re: Are we better off than the prehistoric man?

    Quote Originally Posted by ab9924 View Post
    HAHAHAHA This is very good.

    Actually, my logic is that although I don't know any gang guys, if I totally mess up, I would be homeless, and then I would have to join a street gang like everyone else for survival, and then eventually either a fellow gang member, or an opponent gang, or the police would get my head. Isn't this true for everybody?

    How many homeless people do you know? I'm an ex-cop and I've spent a lot of time on the "bad" side of town. Most homeless people don't belong to a gang. Most gang members live in a house and drive a car and finance it through drug dealing and etc. Joining a gang is usually about where you were born and who you grew up around, not about being homeless.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  8. #108
    Educator / Liar Champion ab9924's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sharing time between UK and US.
    Last Seen
    11-19-12 @ 10:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    904

    Re: Are we better off than the prehistoric man?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Fine. Fill me in on these wonderful social aspects I'm missing.
    Okay, for example, in a prehistoric society, everyone in the horde/group had a role. It was never the role of getting fat whilst idle or wondering about one's own usefulness. Every member was accepted unconditionally, and they understood their roles and worked it.

    In modern society, every acceptance is conditional, every role is questionable, and every value is only a consequence of erratic market volatilities.

    So, the prehistoric guy had mental security, and from that, he could bid for physical security. The modern guy can have neither.

  9. #109
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,451
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Are we better off than the prehistoric man?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    But most people are NOT homeless, and most people have NOT been raped by a streetgang. Perhaps you are spending too much time fretting over things that are really rather unlikely?



    Men have not magically become angels, no. However, to pretend that nothing has changed for the better is nonsense.

    Do some research into the Rennaisance. We have no conception of the daily threat of violence many people lived under in those days: vicious crime, oppressive rulers who could have you tortured on a whim, marauding bandits and mercenaries, the threat of war hanging over them every day, the perils of being conquered (pillage, rape and plunder were once great sports for the military), the joys of annual plagues and so on.

    In my studies about Elizabethan London, I learned that it was considered a mortal peril to try to travel in London much after dark. Persons of property who did so, did it with armed servants holding lit-match Arquebuses and lanterns on poles, and kept their swords and bucklers handy. Some scholars believe that many Rennaisance-era cities had more street crime and violence than any modern megapolis.


    I think you need to study a bit about primitive tribes from a more neutral and scholarly source. As I've said they were not, for the most part, angelic innocents. I'm part Native American and in the time I spent studying that part of my cultural heritage it became clear that "the Noble Savage" was largely myth. Further studies about Amazon and African tribes confirmed this thesis.
    The biggest myth is that primitive peoples lived in "harmony" with nature.

    The reality is they moved when they had eaten every animal and plant within walking distance of the camp. So much so that it usually took more than one year for the environment to bounce back.

    The extinction of megafauna in North America is suapisciously concurrent with the spread of Homo Sapiens. Makes sense since they evolved without homonids.
    Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
    The Psychology of Persuasion

  10. #110
    Educator / Liar Champion ab9924's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sharing time between UK and US.
    Last Seen
    11-19-12 @ 10:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    904

    Re: Are we better off than the prehistoric man?

    Quote Originally Posted by ChuckBerry View Post
    I'm 41...my wife is 27 (nearly 28).

    Theory shot down.
    How did you convince her family not to tell her that she is making a mistake whilst shooting 45 calibers at you?
    (Okay, but really, this is sooo interesting, all the girls I know would not take this to marriage, how does this work?)

Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •