Re: evolutionary success of humans
- From: John Wilkins <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 22:50:44 -0500 (EST)
JoeSP wrote:
> "Earle Jones" <earle.jones@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message=20
> news:dma84h$2g6e$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>=20
>>In article <dm2s1n$2cgt$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
>>"Ron O" <rokimoto@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>>*
>>Jared Diamond (Guns, Germs, and Steel author) wrote that the biggest
>>mistake ever made by man was the invention of agriculture. Ref:
>>
>>The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race
>>
>>By Jared Diamond
>>University of California at Los Angeles Medical School
>>
>>Discover Magazine, May 1987
>>
>>Pages 64-66
>>
>>Illustrations by Elliott Danfield
>>
>>"To science we owe dramatic changes in our smug self-image.
>>Astronomy taught us that our earth isn=B9t the center of the universe
>>but merely one of billions of heavenly bodies. From biology we
>>learned that we weren=B9t specially created by God but evolved along
>>with millions of other species. Now archaeology is demolishing
>>another sacred belief: that human history over the past million
>>years has been a long tale of progress. In particular, recent
>>discoveries suggest that the adoption of agriculture, supposedly our
>>most decisive step toward a better life, was in many ways a
>>catastrophe from which we have never recovered. With agriculture
>>came the gross social and sexual inequality, the disease and
>>despotism, that curse our existence.
>>
>>At first, the evidence against this revisionist interpretation will
>>strike twentieth century Americans as irrefutable. We=B9re better off
>>in almost every respect than people of the Middle Ages, who in turn
>>had it easier than cavemen, who in turn were better off than apes.
>>Just count our advantages. We enjoy the most abundant and varied
>>foods, the best tools and material goods, some of the longest and
>>healthiest lives, in history. Most of us are safe from starvation
>>and predators. We get our energy from oil and machines, not from our
>>sweat. What neo-Luddite among us would trade his life for that of a
>>medieval peasant, a caveman, or an ape?
>>
>>For most of our history we supported ourselves by hunting and
>>gathering: we hunted wild animals and foraged for wild plants. It=B9s
>>a life that philosophers have traditionally regarded as nasty,
>>brutish, and short. Since no food is grown and little is stored,
>>there is (in this view) no respite from the struggle that starts
>>anew each day to find wild foods and avoid starving. Our escape from
>>this misery was facilitated only 10,000 years ago, when in different
>>parts of the world people began to domesticate plants and animals.
>>The agricultural revolution spread until today it=B9s nearly universal
>>and few tribes of hunter-gatherers survive."
>>
>>earle
>>*
>>
>=20
>=20
> It appears that Diamond was only partially right. I'm sure that life wa=
sn't=20
> so "nasty, brutish and short" during the periods of plenty, or during t=
imes=20
> of expansion and conquest. But basic rules of biology dictate that=20
> populations increase during the good times, and when resources fall sho=
rt of=20
> demand, life then begins to become nasty, brutish and short.
>=20
> The archaeological record is full of Neolithic evidence for starvation,=
=20
> disease and violence on a scale comparable to modern times. Genocide wa=
s=20
> practiced then as now, but it's probably not accurate to declare one ag=
e=20
> superior to another in the quality of life. Population dynamics tend t=
o=20
> make those decisions for us.
>=20
>=20
Diamond, or rather those who he is relying upon, such as David Rindos'=20
_Origins of Agriculture_ (1984), deals with this: monocultural societies =
(that=20
have a single staple food source) are unusually sensitive to fluctuations=
in=20
the productivity of that staple. Moreover, they tend to have major defici=
ts in=20
their overall dietary needs, lacking vitamins and minerals that contribut=
e to=20
growth. HGs, OTOH, tend to have wide and diverse ranges of food, and are =
able,=20
if they survive the first five years, to grow taller and more healthily.
Skeletal evidence suggests that agrarian societies tend to grow shorter, =
live=20
shorter, and have more diet-related illnesses. On the other hand, the ene=
rgy=20
budget for these societies is much higher than HG societies, and so the=20
population density is much higher. It's a trade-off, or it was until we w=
ere=20
able to transport varieties of food quickly and freshly (i.e., in the pas=
t 140=20
years or so) - either you live long and well but have a very high neonate=
and=20
child death rate, or you have a lowered under 5 death rate with lower hea=
lth,=20
shorter lifespans and shorter stature.
HGs tend on average, if memory serves, to work about 2-4 hours a day seek=
ing=20
food in most environments. The rest of the time, they live doing social=20
things. This makes sense as an ancestral lifestyle - we needed to sociali=
se if=20
we were to evolve our present traits. Farmers work 16 hours days in=20
backbreaking labour, and tend to be socially isolated. Urban lifestyles a=
re=20
something else again.
--=20
John S. Wilkins, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Biohumanities Project
University of Queensland - Blog: evolvethought.blogspot.com
Nihil tam absurdum quod non quidam Philosophi dixerit - Cicero
.
- References:
- evolutionary success of humans
- From: pauldepstein
- Re: evolutionary success of humans
- From: Ron O
- Re: evolutionary success of humans
- From: Earle Jones
- Re: evolutionary success of humans
- From: JoeSP
- evolutionary success of humans
- Prev by Date: Re: current path of human evolution
- Next by Date: Re: Group selected altruism - (was: Hamilton's rule)
- Previous by thread: Re: evolutionary success of humans
- Next by thread: Re: evolutionary success of humans
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|