Re: It's not true that love is blind


"Tom McDonald" <tmcdonald2672@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:hp5Pj.89$Ov3.37@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
David wrote:
On Apr 20, 10:44 pm, Tom McDonald <tmcdonald2...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
David wrote:

<snip>

as to
whether warfare is a hardwired instinct that archaeological
evidence can be adduced for.
I will give you this chance; it's a one-time-only deal. Consider
very carefully before you reply.

This is your opportunity:

What would you look for, in the material culture of the past,
that would provide evidence as to whether warfare is 'hardwired'
in humans?

You might wish to start by defining what you mean by 'warfare';
and what archaeological remains exist, to your knowledge, that
are: (1) undisputed evidence of what you define as warfare; and
(2) evidence that might or might not be evidence of what you
define as warfare.

This has to be your work. If you ask others to do this work for
you, or if you only give websites without *significant*
discussion in your own words, then I will let you go your own way.

And don't tell me that you are up for this, or spend any time
whatsoever talking about relationships or your ability, or that
others misunderstand you, etc. If you do that, you will have
squandered this opportunity. It will not come again, from this
quarter.

After diligent search on Google Scholar, sci.arch, and Science
Frontiers my investigation for hardwire instinct for human
warfare with focus on paleolithic warfare turned into a dud.
I had hoped for evidence, however slight, over vast stretches
of time.

I didn't ask you what others thought. In fact, I specifically asked *you*
to think about:

1. what *you* mean by "warfare", and;

2. what *you* would expect to find in the archaeological record if warfare
is part of human nature.

This really isn't all that hard. I'm not asking for final, definitive,
absolutely true answers. I'm only asking you what *you* think might be
starting points for the discussion.

*Your* ideas, David. Think for yourself.

Try again. If you include a single reference or suggestion for others to
follow up on, or make a single comment about relationships with ng
posters, I will not respond.

Cogent questions, though, I'll consider.

<snip non-responsive material>

You didn't really think he would do anything except post some URS's and
suggest that YOU study them, did you?


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Its not true that love is blind
    ... whether warfare is a hardwired instinct that archaeological ... evidence can be adduced for. ... that would provide evidence as to whether warfare is 'hardwired' ... <snip non-responsive material> ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Its not true that love is blind
    ... whether warfare is a hardwired instinct that archaeological ... What would you look for, in the material culture of the past, that would provide evidence as to whether warfare is 'hardwired' in humans? ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Its not true that love is blind
    ... whether warfare is a hardwired instinct that archaeological ... evidence can be adduced for. ... that would provide evidence as to whether warfare is 'hardwired' ... warefare, ancient warfare, archaeology etc. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: From NEARA - The paddle symbol to be found at Peterborough(Ontario)
    ... >> Age System, which your link below refers to, and along with the ... > of "war like" is. ... There is very little evidence, relatively speaking, for the period in ... used for warfare (and there are no real reasons why such an interpretation ...
    (sci.archaeology)