Human History Gets a Rewrite

[Hanslune]

A new book that might be of interest to many here.

Quote

The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2021/11/graeber-wengrow-dawn-of-everything-history-humanity/620177/?utm_source=pocket-newtab

Quote

Graeber and Wengrow offer a history of the past 30,000 years that is not only wildly different from anything we’re used to, but also far more interesting: textured, surprising, paradoxical, inspiring.

 

Quote

The bulk of the book (which weighs in at more than 500 pages) takes us from the Ice Age to the early states (Egypt, China, Mexico, Peru). In fact, it starts by glancing back before the Ice Age to the dawn of the species. Homo sapiens developed in Africa, but it did so across the continent, from Morocco to the Cape, not just in the eastern savannas, and in a great variety of regional forms that only later coalesced into modern humans. There was no anthropological Garden of Eden, in other words—no Tanzanian plain inhabited by “mitochondrial Eve” and her offspring. As for the apparent delay between our biological emergence, and therefore the emergence of our cognitive capacity for culture, and the actual development of culture—a gap of many tens of thousands of years—that, the authors tell us, is an illusion. The more we look, especially in Africa (rather than mainly in Europe, where humans showed up relatively late), the older the evidence we find of complex symbolic behavior.

The writers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Graeber, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Wengrow

[+Pettytalk]

"A new book that might be of interest to many here." ?????? The Dawn of Everything: A new history of Humanity? Does the title imply that the old, and currently established history of humanity is somehow, and in some ways historically incorrect?

 

 

[Hanslune]

3 hours ago, Pettytalk said:

"A new book that might be of interest to many here." ?????? The Dawn of Everything: A new history of Humanity? Does the title imply that the old, and currently established history of humanity is somehow, and in some ways historically incorrect?

Yep, it usually is. As new information comes in it changes. Early 60s Vikings in Newfoundland, Catalhuyuck, DNA allow us to peer into deep time, Gobekli Tepe, etc, etc lots of stuff being found or re evaluated and causing shifts in the what we take a s history.

The history of the prehistoric and historic world changes every day as several score of papers are published. I think its about 15,000 a year - but that is a guesstimate.

Edited October 21, 2021 by Hanslune

[jaylemurph]

I got a review copy of this. So far it’s worth the hype. 

—Jaylemurph 

[Hanslune]

1 hour ago, jaylemurph said:

I got a review copy of this. So far it’s worth the hype. 

—Jaylemurph 

Yes, a number of folks I knew had sent me emails or facebooked their like of it. Dang, I may have to read it now or become socially outcast!

[+Pettytalk]

2 hours ago, Hanslune said:

DNA allow us to peer into deep time, Gobekli Tepe, etc, etc lots of stuff being found or re evaluated and causing shifts in the what we take a s history.

It seems that based on this, the time set for Atlantis may not be too farfetched. At least for those that maintained that any type of significant civilization could not have existed that far back (approximately 11,600 years ago). Those seeking Atlantis may have found new life, if academia accepts the contents of this interesting book. A new dawn for Atlantis seekers. However, I'm on record that the timeline given by Plato was referring to something else, a clue, rather than an actual date.

This is a good time for you to convince Rupert to contribute to history, and have his DNA tested, as he may be a real Atlantian, if he dates back that far in time.  I may just invest in that book, and get me a copy, especially since our resident expert, Jay, approves of it. Not just anybody receives a review copy from the authors/publishers, I'm, assuming.

[Hanslune]

3 hours ago, Pettytalk said:

It seems that based on this, the time set for Atlantis may not be too farfetched. At least for those that maintained that any type of significant civilization could not have existed that far back (approximately 11,600 years ago).

No one 'maintains' that they simply look at the existing evidence and guess what? No sign of such a civilization. Some people have speculated that civilizations may not have existed then - currently they haven been shown to be wrong. Those who speculate that there may be or were such civilization have not been able to show any evidence that there are any. Currently GT is considered a culture.

 

Quote

Those seeking Atlantis may have found new life, if academia accepts the contents of this interesting book. A new dawn for Atlantis seekers. However, I'm on record that the timeline given by Plato was referring to something else, a clue, rather than an actual date.

They appears to ( I have not read it yet) be basing it on a re-ordering history based on evidence that has been found not speculation of what hasn't been.

Quote

This is a good time for you to convince Rupert to contribute to history, and have his DNA tested, as he may be a real Atlantian, if he dates back that far in time.  I may just invest in that book, and get me a copy, especially since our resident expert, Jay, approves of it. Not just anybody receives a review copy from the authors/publishers, I'm, assuming.

Oh, he is a real Atlantean and he also insists that he doesn't exist in this space time.

I haven't asked Jay why he was so blessed to receive such munificent gift.

I suspect it is due to his shadowy connections with Turkish supermarket employees, disbarred Orthodox Priests, French shop keepers and Icelandic baristas. On second thought perhaps we shouldn't as he might have to have an emergency whole body tattoo removal operation.

Edited October 21, 2021 by Hanslune

[Nobu]

22 hours ago, Hanslune said:

A new book that might be of interest to many here.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2021/11/graeber-wengrow-dawn-of-everything-history-humanity/620177/?utm_source=pocket-newtab

 

The writers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Graeber, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Wengrow

Amazon?

[Nobu]

Never mind. Found it and ordered.

[cladking]

Looks like Graeber and I are on the same page a lot;

"Much of Graeber's later scholarship focused on the topic of "bull**** jobs", proliferated by administrative bloat and what Graeber calls "managerial feudalism". One of the points he raised in his 2013 book The Democracy Project—on the Occupy movement—is the increase in what he calls bull**** jobs, referring to forms of employment that even those holding the jobs feel should not or do not need to exist. He sees such jobs as being typically "concentrated in professional, managerial, clerical, sales, and service workers".^[45] "

In my experience most of the work in industry and finance is for individuals to invent new paper work for other individuals and to eliminate jobs that require physical work.  Nothing gets done so more managers are hired to try to fix the problem caused by an overload of paper and nobody actually working.  75% of management could be eliminated but if it were they would get rid only of managers who are actually managing and leave the paper pushers. 

 

If management were streamlined then product quality would soar.  

[Golden Duck]

Is it difficult to get a Coat-tails licence?  How much does it cost?

 

[Thanos5150]

Quote

The author of Debt: The First 5,000 Years and bull**** Jobs, Graeber, it’s worth bearing in mind, was a committed anarchist who was instrumental in setting up the Occupy Wall Street protest. Another factor that bears consideration is that both archaeology and anthropology are disciplines that are notoriously vulnerable to subjective interpretation....

Yet there is a distinct sense of cherrypicking, of stringing together examples that fit the broad sweep of their argument, and dismissing the rest. One historian has accused them of making at least one “ballistically false” claim (that captured settlers in America preferred to remain with their native captors).

Source

David Graeber and David Wengrow’s anarchist history of humanity.

Source:

Quote

Yet the question the authors repeatedly ask, but never quite answer, is how did we get ‘stuck’ in a system of hierarchies and striking inequalities in power and consumption? Despite jumping to conclusions and speculating almost every time, the two Davids suddenly become wary when confronted with this central mystery that haunts their book.

They write that “for now the material at our disposal, especially for the early stages of the process, is still too scarce and ambiguous to give definitive answers”. In reality, that caveat could be applied to almost anything discussed in this book, but it wouldn’t have been nearly as entertaining and thought-provoking.

Caveat emptor. 

Edited October 22, 2021 by Thanos5150

[Hanslune]

15 hours ago, cladking said:

Looks like Graeber and I are on the same page a lot;

 

No, not at all Graeber is a firm believer in evidence, science, rational discourse and releasing ones data and research in a form where his argument and reasons are clearly displayed. He also makes mistakes.

Your methodology on the other hand is:

To make claims without evidence, lie, refuse to answer questions, be irrational, illogical, refuse to provide evidence of any kind, NOT publish or provide your research and data and repeating the same un-evidenced claims over and over again. He is doing it right, you are doing it very wrong.

You are a good example of how not to provide information to support an idea instead you've done a magnificent job in killing it with BS and lying.

Edited October 22, 2021 by Hanslune