The dawn of everything - a new science of human history with David Wengrow
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 06. 2024
- Science & Cocktails is proud to present an evening with archeology superstar David Wengrow, acclaimed writer of the book "The Dawn of Everything" on the history of inequality with the anthropologist David Graeber. David Wengrow will take you deep into the history of humanity that no one knows about. Was there an "original" form of human society? Why is our conventional understanding of human history wrong? Was there an Agricultural Revolution? Does living in cities make inequality inevitable? Is our present global order fixed in place by social evolution: are we stuck?
Our conventional understanding of human history is wrong. Our species did not spend 95 percent of its evolutionary past in tiny bands of hunter-gatherers. So what were we doing all that time? Agriculture and cities did not mean a plunge into hierarchy and domination. So where does inequality really come from? Drawing on findings from his best-selling book, The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity - co-authored with the late David Graeber - David Wengrow explains how archaeology and anthropology are providing startling new answers to these major questions, revealing a prehistoric world more varied and unexpected than we knew, and a future more open and free than we imagine.
David Wengrow is a professor of comparative archaeology at the Institute of Archaeology, University College London, and has been a visiting professor at New York University. He is the author of several books, including What Makes Civilization?. Wengrow conducts archaeological fieldwork in various parts of Africa and the Middle East. a recipient of the Antiquity Prize and has delivered the Rostovtzeff Lectures (New York University), the Jack Goody Lectures (Max Planck Institute) and the Biennial Henry Myers Lecture (Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain).
For more cool science visit:
• Website: www.scienceandcocktails.org
• Facebook: / scienceandcocktailscph
• CZcams: / sciencecocktails
• Instagram: / scienceandcocktailsglobal - Věda a technologie
I love learning from David Wengrow he is one of my favorite people. Also RIP David Graeber, the world is a worse place without you.
Having politicians be ritually mocked and beaten to impress on them the gravity of their position sounds like a damned good idea to me!
We had that once in Stalins Russia and Maos China.
@@alias4096 inaccurate. These were not rituals meant for politicians but instead for "party" or "class" traitors. Cultural revolution was again never about politicians, Mao told children to beat their teachers to death but they never were supposed to punch the politicians or party leaders unless Mao told them to. Which he of course never said was meant to be done with himself but only people that went against his ideas.
@@gtjus 😂😂 those politicians had to be removed in order for the communists to take power
Similar type of such rituals still exist today - although less brutal - for instance in regions with carnevals such as Basel, Switzerland, where the mocking of all authority is part of a many centuries old carneval ritual.
@@alias4096 well china seems to be doing pretty good these days so i guess lets do that
Amazing. I am reading this book. I am from Brazil. This man is incredible. And so, I think, was David Graeber. Thank you so much.
In Asia, for instance, nobody has ever heard of Hobbes or Rousseau. There was no Enlightenment in Asia comparable to the European Enlightenment. The dynasties took a different path. They gave the world a thousand inventions - opera, moveable type printing press, porcelain, gunpowder, noodles, tea, silk...
They had people like Lao Tzu and the apostles of the Buddha over two thousand years before Hobbes or Rousseau, so yeah, they definitely had an enlightenment.
@@slappy8941 Yes, they had their own enlightenment, just not the European enlightenment.
@Paul Gauthier The discourse was different: Harmony and balance in place of the nature of nature.
But archaeology in Asia was still the province of Europeans, who were still operating under the Enlightenment frameworks, soooooo.... Yes, throughout Asia societies had their own frameworks, but they weren't doing archaeology until they realized Euro-americans were taking all their ancient stuff. Now, they do their own archaeology but unfortunately it's very often done under the aegis of nationalist frameworks, nationalism being still a European intellectual import.
@@almishti Archaeology developed out of antiquarianism in Europe during the 19th century, no?
In Australia, the Ancient people there, used to do agriculture and walking Hunting gathering
I randomly purchased their book on an impulse, so glad I did. It is the most interesting and paradigm-shifting book I have ever read.
Same here - It was subtly recommended in a LinkedIn post by someone I hardly know, in a post I almost scrolled by. The book title sounded to be promising, and whoever recommended it might have mentioned something about archeological evidence, and, although I am not into archeology that much, I felt a small spark of interest. I bought the book, read it, and my God how glad I am that I did!
Since it wasn't yet released in my native language (Hungarian) I started to work on translating it - because this book must be read by and has to spark thoughts of as many people as possible.
@@oumarh.gassama8063 what would you say that you learned from the book? Will your knowledge save our civilizations from decay?
@@peacepoet1947 What I learned is that the "Shifting Baseline Syndrome" is very much present when it comes to how we view our world, our societies, our politics, and how we limit our perception of possible improvement paths of these aforementioned areas. I definitely learned that the limited and incomplete knowledge of history we acquire in public education is not sufficient enough to build a healthier and more effective world view - it is a nice foundation but we have to build so much more specific knowledge upon it for even becoming able to start to notice the real problems, let alone thinking of solutions.
I also learned how important stories are to our overall societal improvement over ages and generations: just alone the fact that for example how a native American legend told throughout generations about a cannibalistic monster-wizard (who much likely was at a historical timepoint a living sovereign of a centralized empire-like society that eventually failed due to it's inherent unjust political and societal structure) helped a whole society to not just learn from past mistakes but to achieve a level of societal and political sustainability that is (with a bit of over-exaggeration) more just and sustainable that of our "modern" civilizations could even dream of.
And it is not MY knowledge. For the book, what is in there is a knowledge of history and of inherent human sociology, which knowledge helps us to break out from recent distorted and severely limited world views - opening up the mind to seek more of this knowledge by examining complex human societal and political behavior dated back well before the commonly known historical periods.
Will it save our civilizations from decay? For that to answer, I think we first have to define what exactly our "civilizations" are, and if _changing_ our way of how we organize ourselves as human societies on this planet would be called a positive change or a decay? Because I believe that the current course of our mainstream societal and political pathways and policies have to have a radical change if we want to build a truly sustainable and "future proof" society. I believe that the toxic illusion of infinite growth (on a finite planet) has to be turned around - and some (in my opinion) wrongly would want to call such changes as "decay".
@@oumarh.gassama8063 thanks for sharing your thoughts with me and other people. Change is generally thought to be a positive change because you wouldn't want to change anything that works.
If the reader will allow these thoughts, I tend to see it like this. At the core of every human society sits the one thing upon which everything is built. It could be the ebb and flow of prehistoric social systems; it could be todays electronic and digital global world. At the core sits the one thing that drives the whole of it.
Knowledge.
Tested and validated sets of information that inform and aide the construction of the society of the time. Our society, all human gatherings, are constructed on this basis. All of it is curiosity driven and scientific in its nature, and interestingly enough it seems culture emerges out of the dynamic of that aggregating, accreting, knowledge.
You don't need cities for this. You don't even need civilizations as we are wont to define them these days. What you need are social networks that communicate that knowledge across regions and, more importantly, thru time.
This is the defining attribute for us primates. Our ability to create and use complex self-generating networks that go on to support our deepening social complexity over time. It has been so supportive that it has allowed us to separate from the natural rhythms of planetary life. At least, for a time.
I'm leaving aside how estranged we all are these days from the natural world, and what that might portend for us all. It could be bad. It could be good given our ability to recognize error and change.
In any case take that knowledge away and all you've got left is a primate little more than animal. Which never happens to us though there have been times when we've clearly lost vast amounts of very valuable knowledge. I presume this from just a glance at the likes of megalithic ruins that boggle our understanding.
Our ability to retain, store and transmit into the future, knowledge we consider of high value is one of the main attributes in what makes us Human. And none of it requires the inequalities of Kings, Emperors, slaves, police or any sort of top-down hierarchical system to affect. All it arises simply as a function of being intelligent social animals. It's a form of emergence.
Just some thoughts. This is a great presentation, and the book is even better.
John~
American Net'Zen
I started at 15:30 because he summarizes the "wrong story" in a recap that saves time.
Not a bad idea to increase playback speed as well.
Why are you in such a hurry? It seems like so many people are taking stimulants or something. I can't stand listening to chip-monks. David's pace is just right for me.
When you eat, do you bother chewing, or do you just swallow everything whole? I like to savor ideas as I listen.
He sounds perfect at 1.25 speed.
You are brave to tell the truth to an audience of Savid Wnngrow devotees. He clearly has something to say but he is a slow monotonous talker. He needs to be more to the point and to get on with it. His lecture could be delivered in ten minutes.
Finally, an evidence-based account of our collective history! Also happens to be a much more hopeful and inspiring history :)
I think you mean evidence-BIASED. Graeber was a hard core leftist and anti-capitalist.
There are numerous examples of "collectivist" and egalitarian cultures throughout prehistory and history... A quick study of North American indigenous cultures (available since I was born) would bear this out. Good book, but it hardly topples current thinking about the history of human societal organization.
@@christophercousins184just say communism. Please say communism. It’s human nature, please just say communism
@@hiera1917 I think you're probably right that it would be "natural" to live in communal settings for people who live in hunter-gatherer/horticultural societies (I'm assuming that's what you mean, that it's "human nature" to live in a social structure you call "communism"), but "communism" has other connotations in my my mind. Communism as we think of it in modern terms is a response to capitalism or existing hierarchies (sometimes by a nation or state or sometimes just an old fashioned commune). That's the problem with this frame , IMO, they conflate a kind of self-aware modern communism (a conscious response to the existing economic and social order) with a natural social organizing principle that we think of as communal.
Early neolithic cultures weren't responding to an existing social order (at least, there is no evidence of this), they were organized in a way that made sense for the world they lived in.
Would you say that the Iroquois Nation were communists? Or that they live in communal societies? Or do you just see these as interchangeable terms?
(BTW, I'm not anti-communist or pro-capitalist, I just think the term "communism" doesn't apply to pre-agricultural societies)
@@christophercousins184 Agreed. They would not have conceptualized their societies as 'communist' in the modern sense.
A groundbreaking book that everyone should read, or at least read it and tell everyone you can. Our unique human trait is imagination and creativity, and every single person that has ever lived has exercised that skill
“The Dawn of Everything “ would be a hard slog for a lot of people. For most people, “ancient” means the Athenian and Roman Empires.
I am not sure that all have excercised such. I dont know that followers & the obedient have any need for imagination & creativity… They seem to dismiss, disregard & denigrate the concepts.
Do they? Most people seem pretty dumb, and barely awake to me.
@@TheMargarita1948 I love prehistory. I'm excited to read it.
You don't actually have to read it though ...you can just choose to ignore what you've been taught, and instead observe.
We are NOT at all, what we have been told we are. We are NOT warring in nature, we are not racist or hateful, despite their greatest efforts to make us so.
Another important fact is many of the elements we call Civilized, like the use of Bronze or later Iron, and the Wheel, or Wine are NOT created in places like Egypt or Sumeria. They literally are concepts foundational to what most people would call 'civilized' or civilization but were created in places outside of it by most people's conception, because those other places held a degree of civilization, but conceptually are defined as something else.
Sometimes I think "Civilization" is harder to pin down with a concrete definition than we assume. It's as if we conflate "State" with "Civilization". So get baffled as to how ancient people did anything without a "state" running everything. A lot of the apparent mystery around "Ancient Civilizations" appears because of our belief that without a State, non-Civilised people were crawling around with no art, stories, architecture.
The Native American rendezvous is a good example. Once a years in summer the various clan groups would gather to trade and compete. I observed what I came to call the “magic three.” Large, medium, small. Father, mother and child. The original holy trinity. Then up to the clan level. Next the tribe. Then the nation
the lecture sounds like one I had years ago in philosophy. It is the same story every time I here it. I have had dealings with 'elites', but I did not see any difference in them. The intelligence is just middle level.
Sounds similar to the original Olympic, Pythian etc games in ancient Greece. Those started as inter-tribal festivals as well. And before the victory of kingship around 300 BC Athens was a collection of wattle and daub houses. No marble in sight.
Just amazing! I loved your book, mr. Wengrow.
A wonderful insight. Amazing.
Yes I have been under the assumption that larger population centres were stratified and autocratic. The tendencies to power and greed in ascendance. It sounds like this is not true.
However, David needs to explain how thereafter most large societies ended up with a hierarchical structure.
Make it eleven instances of domestification. We have now found evidence along the west cost of Canada that also shows the presence of maintained crops.
Interesting. Do you have a reference for that?
@@squatch545 Some Canadian told him.
All of human history is a struggle for power and control, as a mitigation of fears. It's that simple. The factor that allowed us to survive is compassion, love.
There's fear and there's love. The friction between humans over those two emotions is the underlying cause of human struggle.
Very true. I once had a discussion with Barbara Ehrenreich along these same lines regarding her book "Blood Rites" which took her 11 years of research. To me the Universe is a System of Archetypal States. It is all very Zoroastrian. I see you have Carlos Santana on your channel. . Look into the religion of his Professional Drummer Wife Cindy Blackman. There is a big change coming. BTW, compliments on your hair style. A good look!
AMEN TO THAT
Have you no curiosity
@@unfingbelievable1 yes but,
As simple as that, eh. Thank goodness we can finally do away with bothersome nuance and subtlety. That stuff just gets confusing, don't you think? Refreshing to consider that the human experience can be condensed into bossing our fellows and running from tigers.
I loved this! Such a fantastic orator. Everytime he took a sip, I'm like, yes you deserve it. Thanks!
This is way better doubling the playback.
speed.
Love from Bangladesh 🇧🇩🇧🇩🇧🇩🇧🇩
Ancient Tribal settlements dependent on forest or small scale agriculture always used to have councils and not kings . their mechanisms were mostly designed to solve their internal issues like violating their rules. Their requirement for strong militia increased with prosperity to defend themselves against the thieves and bandits who came to plunder and did not have any social commitments like family land etc. Gradually the system of king and maintaining an army by collective contribution (tax?) came in to being .Only those who were able bodied and could control the Army could become Kings and thy started using the power against their own people to control the whole group of citizens. There used to be power struggles everywhere and no Utopia any where. The tribal councils can be found even today in many countries who are in conflict with their governments/people
That hour went by fast, extremely fascinating!
Thankyou. You have opened my eyes to a new way of thinking about both the past and the future. Can't wait to read your book! Yuval who? 😁
Fascinating and thought provoking stuff!
"Only a person with a pure soul can make a good soup". - Beethoven
Yes; indeed; yes. About time someone started pushing back against the hubris of "Western" ethnocentricity. Right, or wrong, or just the beginning of asking the relevant questions for the accurate answers, I love that the debate is on! 🥰
Western ethnocentrism? Interesting! Yet it is the evil, evil, west that came up with, and is still obsessed with it's very own' Out Of Africa' theory.
Lmao. Wait until you found out who really built those ''Mayan' structures.
Listen at 1.5 speed omg his guy cant get those words out
I study the digital divide and this really resonates with me. Call me old school but I recall the Internet generating a sense, in some, not just that the world would become more connected, but that the Internet (& ICTs (information communications technologies)) could act as a tool for bridging inequality. This archaeological evidence suggests a basic instinct that humans have to effectively support one another in a more flat hierarchy because it is demonstratively more effective in improving so many macro measurements of human flourishing. I still hold that hope for the Internet & ICTs; perhaps we can still find that in each one other and within ourselves again.
My goodness--this is wonderful! So exciting to hear this. And his voice is a bonus--what a pleasant voice to learn from.
Excellent
All books have a firm base of what went before to compare themselves with. Except this book.
1.5 speed is perfect for David.
Exactly the review of humanity in terms of something more like jargon and bias free dynamics of population relationships we need. Ie one step removed from the innate language bias of politics.
It seems that our ancestors were strongly aware of phonics, musical relative-timing ratio-rates of resonant cavities and reflective structures, and is directly related to THE MEMORY CODE of cultural management by awareness of the natural probabilistic timing-phases of time to categorise phenomena.
Your comment is intriguing and leaves me confused. Is there a reference to explain some of the concepts you mentioned?
Lol you sound like a Dr. Friend of mine
Your statement sounds more like a personal symphonic expression of a love affair with your own verbosity. It reminds me of what an expert is: someone who knows more and more about less and less until he knows everything about nothing at all; and all that leaves you listening and harmonizing to the resonating sound of your own voice in a giant echo chamber. LOL.
Ahhh mmmm, quite.
Superb, scholarly-based opening up of new perspectives.
Totally agree that we have far to go regarding creating more egalitarian/fair societies. Having said that - I do believe Jarad Diamond with “germs, guns and steel” does a better job at explaining general patterns in our journey from hunter gatherer to today ( even if there are some simple overstated generalizations) . I think many people want to sell as many books as him so they like to preach “he got it wrong” This lecture did a disservice by trying to make Teotihuacán (and other places)out as a place where everyone had equal status and sung kumbaya. Their monopoly on obsidian made them the arms factory and super military power of its day in Mezo America They exported their control and military expeditions through leaders like K’inich Yax K’uk Mo who conquered Copan and started his own dynasty there. Human nature is universal and though I agree with the future goals of a presentation like this I don’t think it’s helpful to overstate/misrepresent the pacifism and egalitarian nature of civilizations that proceeded our own.
I was unimpressed by Diamond’s book and surprised at the reception it got, I think it won the Pulitzer or some such award. But it’s geography is destiny message was not something I agree with,
Pooh
What a cool show, science and cocktails 😂 subscribed
Quality
Excellent.
Brasil
When can we get the highlights of this sorech peppered with some animation please
I honestly thought this guy was promoting the Rousseau "state of nature" politically motivated history. I was very pleasantly surprised to see him handily dismantling it.
So this new point of view means we have to question everything including purpose 😮
I'm currently reading this book. Enjoying it.
WHY does it have to be Hobbes OR Rousseau to begin with? Why can it not be varying combinations or both warlike & helpful at the same time?
Let's unpack that by examining the dichotomy between free will vs determinism & selfishness vs altruism.
Let's start with unpacking free will vs determinism by examining a decision all of us make every single day - what to wear. What are the factors that underpin that decision? The 1st one is external temperature - is it hot or cold outside? This is important because of the need to maintain the temperature of our body core at a certain level - cold = rugging up to keep warm & hot = loose thin clothing that allows sweat to escape to keep the body cool. AKA BIOLOGICAL DETERMINISM - our body's needs determine clothing choice. Also in this category are the fabric our clothes are made from - until recently. We get leather from cattle hides, wool from sheep, silk from worms & cotton & linen & from plants. In other words living animals - biology again - provide us with what we need to make our clothes.
What's next? Our plans for the day. Certain functions require certain standards of dress - what we wear to work many of us won't wear when staying at home for the day. AKA SOCIAL DETERMINISM - the social system we live in dictating clothing choice. Also included in social determinism is the style of clothing - we can only buy what's available to purchase in the marketplace. So - as can be seen there is actually very little free will involved in the decision of what to wear.
Now let's look at selfish vs altruistic actions. At their base all altruistic actions are underpinned by selfishness. We do them because they make us look good to others - and coming across as good to others - that's dead selfish of us. Religious people who do good deeds because they want that seat in heaven next to Jesus - selfishness underpinning altruism. Even in hunter/gatherer societies with values that reflect collaboration and community - if the community is strong & doing well then so is each individual member of the group. Selfishness underpins altruism.
I tend to agree, but altruism can also be driven by empathy, with no consideration of reward.
@@slappy8941 yes - AND no. I like the Socratic method of unpacking concepts. So - let's examine altruism vs selfishness the same way I explored free will vs determinism.
There's a plethora of You Tube channels of usually blokes cutting tall grass and cleaning up overgrown gardens for people in need. Often times the houses in question are abandoned - & have been for quite some time.
Cutting the grass is the altruistic act underpinned by empathy for the resident and/or the neighbours - making the neighbourhood look better, giving the person use of their garden again. That is without doubt the PRIMARY motivation for doing such jobs. Knowing others get enjoyment from watching such transformations is the PRIMARY motivation for doing the EXTRA work involving in filming & editing the transformations to post them to You Tube. PRIMARY MOTIVATIONS.
So where's the selfishness? Most times these guys actually run lawn care businesses. Say they do free cuts once a week, with an average value of $100. That means over the course of a year their income gets reduced to the value of $5200. That's actually tax minimisation at work - that $5200 could well mean the difference between two differing tax brackets. You Tube ad revenue probably is sufficient to cover the costs associated with those free cuts - petrol for the mower & edge trimmer, cord for the edge trimmer and not much more. It certainly wouldn't cover any labour cost, including the additional time it takes to set up the camera (which is sometimes moved 2-3 times/cut) or the time taken to edit the video.
So - why do they do that? Selfishness - "look at me, I'm such a good person". It's not being said EXplicitly but rather IMplicitly. This is the SECONDARY MOTIVATION for doing altruistic acts.
Sometimes people engage in ostensibly altruistic acts, and carry on doing those acts past a point where their health & wellbeing suffers, because they won't be able to live with themselves if they walk away unless they can tell themselves they gave the other person EVERY POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITY to avoid a bad outcome that arises out of the first person walking away. That's me at the moment. I'm carer for an adult son with multiple disabilities. Part of that includes being a legally appointed decision maker - which entails additional stress. As I'm 60 last year my older son was added to the legal order with an eventual goal of becoming sole decision maker. As things currently stand my younger son is too much work for his brother & without us - his affairs get handled by a govt agency. Which he doesn't want & I know isn't right for him either. Currently me walking away means govt management of this sons affairs. And unless I think I've given him EVERY possible chance to engage in skill development that will lighten the load somewhat, I can't pull that pin. Because I can't live with myself - that's selfishness on my part. Underpinning an altruistic act that became detrimental to my mental (& to a degree physical) health last year.
Everything is in degrees. Nothing is black or white, rather there are multiple shades of grey.
@@bethdumont9020 hope you and your sons ate doing well. And yeah, emphasis on gradient.
An egalitarian clan? What planet is this fellow from?
Man who never got his hands dirty educating US on farming. And do not forget to throw in a Yuval Harari.
Right on.
wtf are you on about
Will read more of this work, ties in with Graham Handcock, Randle Carlson and Christopher Dunn
Very imaginative.
This guy makes enormous assumptions that he states as fact, though no such evidence exists to making up claims that are provably false.
At about 12mins w/ burial, he assumes 1) those items = wealth (if the items are abundant, it would not = wealth), 2) ignoring possible religious beliefs that would burry such items w/ all respected members of the tribe to have in the afterlife, 3) assumes there is no chief even though Inuit peoples do have Chiefs (the very festival he mentions is based upon a legend of the Chiefs daughter)
To 40:25- yes, there were older cities, (Jericho, for 1), w/ hierarchies. A satellite city doesn’t mean they didn’t have a Chief or leader. I’m also very curious how he know whether inequalities were present in these early cities/ villages/ tribes?
Tell Sabi Abyad had burnt buildings uncovered which could be from conflict (or natural causes or carelessness). There are 4 different sites that compose the area, some being quite large (a 5th mound can’t be excavated due to being a recent burial location), & records show that the people moved between these location every decade or 2- likely to not over use agricultural land.
It is quite possible that this area was a satellite location for an administrate center city..
Native American Tribes had Chiefs, as Hunter gatherers. They also had slaves. They had peace & open trade with some tribes & hostility w/ others (just as we see today)
Slaves and Servants don't necessarily mean the same thing.
Many African tribes for instance the Zulu, under King Shaka Zulu whose kingdom spanned 1/3 (a third) of Africa, would add all the tribes he defeated or conquered to his tribe as lesser clans, depending on if these tribes yielded without battle or if they had specific skills like metal working, farming or iron smelting.
These conquered tribes would take up specific roles within the larger tribe, this wasn't slavery - with chains, whips and summary executions as practiced by the Europeans rather these conquered tribes were free but would pay tribute to the King and the main Zulu tribe at large by providing goods, manpower (young soldiers, farmers, shepherds, servants - for cattle and live stock raring etc) and services.
They would in turn adopt the customs of the Zulu tribe and as time went on would only exist as one clan among many within the tribe. This was also seen among other larger tribes like the Buganda tribe in East Africa which also used this clan based model of expansion by consuming smaller tribes into itself.
Some tribes had (some still have) more than one chief: a medicine chief, a hunter chief, a flint-maker, etc. One's authority was one's expertise-- which brought respect and attention. But, could many people have been wealthy (equally prosperous, relatively speaking) in our prehistory? Maybe.
That is not the case now.
Slavery is mostly thought to have come about after the development of agriculture. On a mass scale, it wasn't economically feasible before then, and the population density, being less, wouldn't support it.
@@MuantanamoMobile The Zulu kingdom of Shaka Zulu did not cover anywhere near a third of Africa. it more or less corresponded to the modern province of KwaZulu -Natal in the Republic of South Africa.
@@MuantanamoMobile one third of the whole african continent? Absolutely not. That one mis statement makes me question your reliability.
thoughts. assume that assumptions are Everywhere --- because they are. learn to Recognize an assumption(s) that is embedded within a statement/idea; near the BEGINNING.
in many cases, the presence of such an assumption renders the statement/idea meaningless. googletranslate
We have know this for a very long time in Ohio....
This is NOT realistic. Humanity did not evolve over the last 20k years but over the previous 1M years. Our brains and morphology are the result of a million years, 50,000 generations of sexual selection and survival. The last 20k years are more like the Yanomami settlements studied by Chagnon, et al. This was an intermediate form of societal integration, partly agricultural and partly hunter/gatherer. These were not peaceful people if Chagnon's reports can be believed.
True hunter/gatherers needed huge areas for even a band of 30 people to survive. Given a predator / prey ratio for warm blooded animals of .04, an equivalent of 750 human equivalent prey individuals are needed for equilibrium to be established. How many square miles is that? For a hundred it is 2500 human equivalents. Unless some sort of agriculture is established, the group must move and/or divide. Chagnon's reports on the Yanomami are instructive.
Wengrow does not go back far enough in his thinking.
The authors are anarchists, they are trying to justify their political ideology with the archaeological record, this is not an objective analysis of prehistory.
or we were created by advanced beings...
Chagnon's reports can not really be believed, as he later became known as a decidedly unethical anthropologist who deliberately set up rivalries and conflicts between groups of his subjects to provoke them against each other, thus providing 'evidence' for the view of the Yanomani that he wanted to report on. It made him a famous anthropologist but he was profoundly dishonest and manipulative; he's one of those figures that made many many societies around the world highly distrustful, even outright hostile, to allowing anthropologists into their midst. He was an ass, in short. There's a book out there about his shenanigans, tho idr the title.
@@almishti this is dubious. According to my reading, he was maliciously tarred by a jealous rival, and even the learned society that investigated him knew these claims, that you supply, were bullshit.
@@almishti the book you’re referring to, I believe, is Darkness In Eldorado. But, as I mentioned above, I believe it’s been clearly shown as a malicious hit-piece. See for instance Dreger’s “Galileo’s Middle Finger.” She’s a science historian.
"Mock on, mock on, Voltaire, Rousseau;
Mock on, mock on; 'tis all in vain!
You throw the sand against the wind,
And the wind blows it back again....
the question is the answer
Not everyone at the time the writings of Hobbes and Rousseau appeared accepted their assertions of how civilizations began, expanded and eventually failed. I am thinking of the European writers who developed the principles of physiocratie, such as Francois Quesnay and Anne Robert Jacques Turgot.
Watch at x1.25
👏
You won't find mound builders where flooding was not evasive.
Incredible
"coon loss" = a depopulation of raccoons or when, during animal poker, a raccoon loses to a possum or weasel.😜 (Someone mistyped a heading which is supposed to be spelled Kuhn for Thomas Kuhn.)
Great documentary!
Cool story psh unreal
I tried listening to the speaker several times on several podcasts but find his style of presenting the material very boring.
Is there a short text version of his points and arguments?
History (the past) is that ego, think of it this way , we recorded the past to try to predict the future, this created calculation. Fortune tellers, knowledge of the past. If you do away with the past, meaning stop thinking of the past, the ego dies or is forgotten. We are being, being is the here and now. So let things be what they are and u can keep your records, they are just that a record. This record is for the seasons and the stars and the things that help you to know when to plant and when it's gonna get cold.... they are not yours to withhold, benefits are for the whole (the I AM) not the part..
And you know if we start thinking of others more than ourselves this perpetual cycle of selfishness will break down and fall away.... give back, dont take back. Yes you may suffer and become someone else's doormat but it will only happen till selfishness dies. Let's leave something for the next generations to come. Your ego will tell you that no one else will help to break the cycle.... so what fuck the ego, it's not real. I AM here to tell you that WE ARE !!!!!
Where there any signs of draught for a prolong amount of time?
I am NOT disagreeing with anyone here, I am just going to make an observation
Hope it turns out being useful and does NOT leave me sounding out of key.
"Early Man" was so inept that in order to feed himself and his offspring he occupied
himself as a hunter/gatherer? Now that's interesting, as "gathering" food is more associated with the sort of things women and children would be doing. However,
coupling that with "hunting" wild and potentially dangerous animals, now calls for a "courageous and complex" approach to feeding your family.
Picking berries and nuts is one thing, any [insert] should be able to get that right, but bringing down "a wild boar", for example, is a whole other "hog".
I am thinking how you guys could rethink the hunter/gatherer label, and just go with something more suitable for "Early Man's" level of intelligence, like, "Forager/
Scavenger". If we are going to imagine "Early Man's Workings",
let's imagine closer to reality gents, we don't want them to think
we are NOT putting enough effort into this All Important Work, do we? Aloha.
Cmt: 237
Let’s ask the Preppers that have been preparing forever
Goodness ... Euro-centric. There are multiple histories of how our humanity created cultures and societies. We don't have a collective history. BTW ... Read Snow Crash by Neil Stephenson (1993).
While this was an elegant presentation I feel that I was left in the dark due to alcoholism.
most people never ever come to an agreement or even understanding on many things, much less archaeologists. and governments deal with it by having rulers, dictators, autocrats and worse, those who keep top positions till death do them apart ! isnt that why we never fail to have the various kinds of governments !?
Uh, there is nothing new under the Sun.
Which just another way of saying,
‘Don’t limit yourself to your vision’
Some times there are certain people naturally born to be leaders very smart and good at observing things and solving problems but if they turn bad it's bad for many if they stay peaceful and humble things are good for many. Sitting Bull Geronamo Gondi Lennon Stalin Hitler Bin laden Castro
haha people in the coments getting mad is hilarious. Guess some eurocentric nerve has been pinched maybe?
Can’t sleep ? 11:42 Listen to this
The truth is that we are the Pure Spirit, the rest is just a myth!
But we must also become the Spirit also! Becoming IS the Point!
Best book in years!
45.41 There was no year zero
It goes from -1 to 1
zero hadn't been invented when this system was put in place
Who thinks if needs fixing?
Like minded minds need less rules, 🤔 Sadly we live in a fearful society, Unbalanced. Humans yearn for peace of mind, maybe it's in our DNA memory?
It’s in the water they poison =Water if Life-Water retains memory so too does breast milk and look what has happened to a civilization that has quit breast feeding their children
@@kimlarso Sad but true.😢
Gobekli Tepe : a universal adapter for any bullshit historical narrative you like
The Story of stories
The verb
33:30
Human = Humane
Whose the man with a bucket on his head? Bucket head?
Or is it a metaphor to discribe people today..
aren't all plants made out of carbon fibers? is that the new thinking? we need carbon fibers. i think they're trying to tell us we need to grow hemp
Plant fibers are made of cellulose, which is a carbohydrate molecule.
Read Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson's book----"Traced"---- for proof of ancestors tracing back to Noah and his family. ✝️
Speed it up to 1.25x and it's listenable
Tl:dr.
"how farming shaped the world" on youtube, shows that it was cereal crops that kick started civilizations and not tubers. I can't post the link. This is new research just recently published.
Nor you tubers!
Jordan Peterson is furious! Hahaha
What happened to the Wenbro people?
There seems like a lot of bias confirmation going on for people educated in a hyper modern academy.
I think you have to be very skeptical of anything that concludes 'and we were right all along'. Especially for things that seem as open to interpretation as archeology.
while it is true about the Iroquois Nation they also destroyed other indigenous tribes as in the Beaver Wars
Strange they have a totally different view of the archaeological record than almost all archeologists.
Specify:
New thinking, it's not bad. I'm familiar with some of this work elsewhere. I live in Louisiana. The First Nations people at Poverty Point didn't have full-scale agriculture, but a kind of highly directed gathering that caused their plants to flourish and grow back vibrantly.
b/crchaeologists of the past were working with a model of what they *thought* was true about the human past that affected the way they interpreted the archaeological record. When in fact the record was showing something else that many--not all--of them lacked the conceptual tools to understand in its proper light.
Maybe because "almost all archeologists" are in the past, in fact most are dead. And most would have laughed at the concept of ground-penetrating radar. "Radar? What the hell is that? Some kind of sci-fi fantasy? Sure, I guess that would be great, if it was real. Save a lot of time, and we might even learn something new."
And that's a bad thing?
protagoras was right all along, I'm left... (giggles)
Iporá Goiás
Who's the guy with a bucket on his head?
If you look at early maps of today's cities, you'll see that the original parcels of land were much smaller than those designed later for larger scale developments. "Property" can be accorded in some fashion to rather small spaces. Spaces that are the exclusive domain of an "owner" can be well maintained for many years because they serve the function of protecting one's belongings (and the labor that went into making or purchasing them) from passing individuals. Writing and calculation were developed to facilitate transactions of things produced. If things were traded, did someone not have to "own" them in order to sell them? Of course, clerics of some sort probably had a role in admonishing people when to plant and exacted some form of tribute for their claims of insight into the divine "will". Those who wanted to keep more of the work of their hands no doubt resented such taxes on their efforts. The fewer kumbayas the more social peace over the long run ....
I think you miss every point attempted to be offered you… maybe i’m mistaken…
David Ricardo shed a good deal of light on the manner by which wealth came to be redistributed from producers to non-producing rentier elites. All that was required was the existence of adequate police powers to enforce private claims to land by some while landlessness existed for most.
I guess you left something off at the beginning.
I enjoyed this, but once I saw the picture of the city in ukrain and how it modeled the description of atlantis, as well what was found in the eye of the sahara. I think there is more to the story and some of that is buried in legend and lost in translation. Something caused all these people to flock together, call it ridiculous, but I suspect it has to do with religion and technology. a kind of that had never been seen or experienced by the undriven survival types that had proceeded these these massive complex and difficult to construct cities for all of humanity
I got turned into this guy as a potentially more grounded alternative to guys like Graham Hancock who, while intriguing, lack the rigor to be taken seriously.
So far, though, I’ve been disappointed with Wengrow. In everything I’ve seen from him and his late collaborator, they seem only peripherally concerned with history/archeology/science. Their main thrust is politics which make them highly suspect to me.
Maybe others find them suspect, too. Seems a dangerous activity, this questioning of the legitimacy of political doctrine. These guys just seem to keep unexpectedly dropping dead. Maybe they should do something less hazardous and 'suspect'. Like racing drivers, big game hunters or high altitude mountaineers...
@@monikacognomen1096 They aren’t important enough to be targets for political assassination. Those of us into these kinds of topics are a niche group of oddballs.
American Indians were "peaceful" villages? Non-hierarchal social organizations have ALWAYS been defeated by hierarchal social organization since the dawn of recorded civilization.. Are they unaware of that? Or just willfully ignoring it to advance a spurious concept.
Inequality ... well life isn't fair! Not in terms of human feelings but life itself doesn't care. Life only seems to care about reproduction and everything else is extra. All plants and animals (life) are trapped in a system to make it to the next day. Inequality in nature is the norm?
This voice could put a raging bull to sleep
There is a difference between the art of war 🎨 the understanding of wars:🤔 The art of war has no weapons no strategy, and it does not depend neither on public opinion or propaganda economical markets or whims of philanthropy . The understanding of war requires public opinion, strategy & propaganda. The art of war The Art object is the wealth the money the value, The understanding of war it is how you manage your assets your equipment, your managers ⚔ generals the quality ⚖ efficiency of your weapons. In the Art of war the goal is attain without making any efforts the artwork describes & becomes the objective of reality that materialized as reality, however the reasons for that victory are unknown it just happens. In the understanding of war victory is achieved by strategy ends ⚙ means. Understanding of war are Failure or success is human while in the ART of war there is a fact, no illusions no mistakes everything happens as the art on the canvas executed by an unknown mysterious hand 😉🐒🐾😥 The understanding of war demands human intervention to achieve any desired objective. The art of war all depends on the artist existence conscious & subconscious mind. 🍷
Nope.
What a charismatic presenter, not.