Not only did farming increase our work hours, reduce our travel, impoverish our diet, and increase social hierarchy, it also greatly increased war. From a Science book review: There are four extant great ape species. Each has a different social system, with chimpanzees being the only species to regularly evidence multimale violent coalitions. …. In chimpanzees, each female … mates with every male in her group. Males join forces to defend their territory … and each male will have access to all those females… Marriage is a universal human behavior, and it is defined by cultural and legal rules proscribing sex outside of marriage, particularly by women. … All available evidence suggests that intergroup violence, practiced primarily by males, does have a long evolutionary history in our species. However, the intensity and nature of that violence is highly variable. …
How dare you! Do you have any idea what was done in Africa during the early industrial period when colonialism was imposed? I suggest you have a look at a bit of history.
It depends on which phase you are looking at.. it is possible that in the early stages before the emergence of the genus Homo there was a phase of mild polygyny.
Miller did not do his homework. Meat does not rot before it could be eaten. It is shared with the whole camp. Amounts in excess are dried or, among arctic groups, cached frozen. Hunting is not about status. I’ve lived with hunter-gatherers. Men rise in status for generosity and other valued behaviour like cooperation, diligence, shrewd intelligence and diplomacy. The most respected men is not necessarily the best hunter. That is just one of many qualities that create a good reputation.
I have also lived with horticultural and other food producing groups in West Africa: hunting is still a common source of extra protein.
The thing that is “signalled” is willingness to engage in cooperative ventures of all kinds, including, if necessary, raids or group punishment of bullies or cheats. Willingness to support the welfare of the community is the measure of reputation and status, but not it’s aim. The respect and honour accorded to men as they prove their loyalty and courage is an end in itself, as it secures them a place in the society. It is only through these measures that men can get the support of the community, and in most cultures, this is needed for marriage and raising a family.
Ok, I read the book. Overall, I would say it's decent, and certainly provides a compelling rebuttal of Guns, Germs, and Steel. The latter half of the book is somewhat speculative, although I would guess the author himself would admit that if asked.
Anyway, it did change my mind about black africans. It does seem that most of them had gotten beyond hunting/gathering by the 19th century. I imagine they would have evolved European level intelligence given a few few more thousand years.
> but Robin, do you have a justification for the opposite conclusion beyond the simple revealed preference of people not seeming to want to commit suicide?
What more could one ask? Someone who doesn't commit suicide is at every moment of their life stating they think life is worth living. What demonstration or reason could be more convincing than that?
Michael H. Hart disagrees with the conventional wisdom (which numbers Jared Diamond among its adherents) that the Sudan and tropical west Africa are sites were farming was independently invented. He thinks it spread from the fertile crescent (where it began ten thousand years ago) to Egypt to the Sudan. He does think the agriculture was practiced in the Sudan seven thousand years ago and in western tropical Africa five thousand years ago. He also thinks they may have independently invented cattle herding six thousand years ago. He does believe that New Guinea highlanders independently invented agriculture (most likely six thousand years ago, but possibly nine thousand). They are related to the Australian aborigenes and have lower IQs (one of Hart's favorite explanatory variables) than sub-Saharan Africans. His account of how Africa became majority Negroe (Diamond just says "black") is the same as that in GG&S: proto-Bantu speakers practiced agriculture & ironworking and hence had an advantage over the hunter-gather Pygmies (the other member of the "Negrid" family) and Sanid (his term for the racial family containing Bushmen/Hottentots aka Khoi-San). The Bantu expansion began a few centuries BC and made them the majority in sub-Saharan Africa by around 1000 AD.
There's a good deal to complain about in Jared Diamond's work, but I still greatly enjoyed GG&S, and to a lesser extent Collapse. If you want an online book that argues against Diamond's political correctness, you're in luck.
I was sort of hoping for something I could read online. Anyway, I don't know about "10,000 Year Explosion," but "Guns Germs and Steel" is complete ideologicially driven nonsense.
The 10,000 Year Explosion by Greg Cochran and Henry Harpending, and Guns, Germs & Steel by Jared Diamond both discuss the beginnings of agriculture in Africa.
"'Violent, stupid, rude, dishonorable, and generally unpleasant people to live with' seems to apply to any group of people one doesn’t like"
I disagree. I don't like liberals, but I would not consider them violent, stupid, rude, or unpleasant. If I were to wander into an environmentalist march, I would not flee in terror. I am not afraid to walk on the street on the Upper West Side at night. And so on.
Actually, sub-saharan Africans (excluding bushmen and pygmies) have been evolving under an agricultural system for some time. Malaria was not as much of a problem before cleared land created environments that served as reservoirs for mosquitoes, and there has been intense recent selection for resistance to malaria. The continent used to have far more bushmen, but they were pushed into the Kalahari by the expansion of Bantu pastoralists. Bushmen are still hunter-gatherers, and anthropologists who have lived among them tend to find them pleasant enough compared to primitive agriculturalists. They're more violent than a modern first world population, but significantly less violent than Yanomamo. Australian aborigines are another group that never had agriculture.
How dare you! Do you have any idea what was done in Africa during the early industrial period when colonialism was imposed? I suggest you have a look at a bit of history.
It depends on which phase you are looking at.. it is possible that in the early stages before the emergence of the genus Homo there was a phase of mild polygyny.
Miller did not do his homework. Meat does not rot before it could be eaten. It is shared with the whole camp. Amounts in excess are dried or, among arctic groups, cached frozen. Hunting is not about status. I’ve lived with hunter-gatherers. Men rise in status for generosity and other valued behaviour like cooperation, diligence, shrewd intelligence and diplomacy. The most respected men is not necessarily the best hunter. That is just one of many qualities that create a good reputation.
I have also lived with horticultural and other food producing groups in West Africa: hunting is still a common source of extra protein.
The thing that is “signalled” is willingness to engage in cooperative ventures of all kinds, including, if necessary, raids or group punishment of bullies or cheats. Willingness to support the welfare of the community is the measure of reputation and status, but not it’s aim. The respect and honour accorded to men as they prove their loyalty and courage is an end in itself, as it secures them a place in the society. It is only through these measures that men can get the support of the community, and in most cultures, this is needed for marriage and raising a family.
Ok, I read the book. Overall, I would say it's decent, and certainly provides a compelling rebuttal of Guns, Germs, and Steel. The latter half of the book is somewhat speculative, although I would guess the author himself would admit that if asked.
Anyway, it did change my mind about black africans. It does seem that most of them had gotten beyond hunting/gathering by the 19th century. I imagine they would have evolved European level intelligence given a few few more thousand years.
> but Robin, do you have a justification for the opposite conclusion beyond the simple revealed preference of people not seeming to want to commit suicide?
What more could one ask? Someone who doesn't commit suicide is at every moment of their life stating they think life is worth living. What demonstration or reason could be more convincing than that?
Thank you . . . . I will check it out if I get a chance.
Michael H. Hart disagrees with the conventional wisdom (which numbers Jared Diamond among its adherents) that the Sudan and tropical west Africa are sites were farming was independently invented. He thinks it spread from the fertile crescent (where it began ten thousand years ago) to Egypt to the Sudan. He does think the agriculture was practiced in the Sudan seven thousand years ago and in western tropical Africa five thousand years ago. He also thinks they may have independently invented cattle herding six thousand years ago. He does believe that New Guinea highlanders independently invented agriculture (most likely six thousand years ago, but possibly nine thousand). They are related to the Australian aborigenes and have lower IQs (one of Hart's favorite explanatory variables) than sub-Saharan Africans. His account of how Africa became majority Negroe (Diamond just says "black") is the same as that in GG&S: proto-Bantu speakers practiced agriculture & ironworking and hence had an advantage over the hunter-gather Pygmies (the other member of the "Negrid" family) and Sanid (his term for the racial family containing Bushmen/Hottentots aka Khoi-San). The Bantu expansion began a few centuries BC and made them the majority in sub-Saharan Africa by around 1000 AD.
Thank you . . . does it address your original point about agrarianism in sub-Saharan Africa?
There's a good deal to complain about in Jared Diamond's work, but I still greatly enjoyed GG&S, and to a lesser extent Collapse. If you want an online book that argues against Diamond's political correctness, you're in luck.
I was sort of hoping for something I could read online. Anyway, I don't know about "10,000 Year Explosion," but "Guns Germs and Steel" is complete ideologicially driven nonsense.
The 10,000 Year Explosion by Greg Cochran and Henry Harpending, and Guns, Germs & Steel by Jared Diamond both discuss the beginnings of agriculture in Africa.
"Actually, sub-saharan Africans (excluding bushmen and pygmies) have been evolving under an agricultural system for some time. "
Do you have a cite/link for this? I would like to read further. Thanks.
"This comment deserves to be censored."
Are offensive opinions prohibited on this blog? If so, that would be ironic.
"'Violent, stupid, rude, dishonorable, and generally unpleasant people to live with' seems to apply to any group of people one doesn’t like"
I disagree. I don't like liberals, but I would not consider them violent, stupid, rude, or unpleasant. If I were to wander into an environmentalist march, I would not flee in terror. I am not afraid to walk on the street on the Upper West Side at night. And so on.
Actually, sub-saharan Africans (excluding bushmen and pygmies) have been evolving under an agricultural system for some time. Malaria was not as much of a problem before cleared land created environments that served as reservoirs for mosquitoes, and there has been intense recent selection for resistance to malaria. The continent used to have far more bushmen, but they were pushed into the Kalahari by the expansion of Bantu pastoralists. Bushmen are still hunter-gatherers, and anthropologists who have lived among them tend to find them pleasant enough compared to primitive agriculturalists. They're more violent than a modern first world population, but significantly less violent than Yanomamo. Australian aborigines are another group that never had agriculture.
This comment deserves to be censored.