The Neolithic Transition Debate

[Kowani]

Ah, the good old days of "died in childbirth".

Laughs in famine

[Rojava Free State]

Ah, the good old days of "died in childbirth".

Laughs in famine

*Cries in thirst*

[Xeng He]

Two things mainly put me off of the hunter-gatherer lifestyle, and those are brain parasites and a lack of plumbing. I have camped in the woods, I will never shit there. Holy fuck.

Brain parasites are bad for obvious reasons.

I wouldn't mind the free dopamine detox at all, though it would be much more difficult to influence the world at large when the world isn't connected, or connected for you.

Perhaps rather than looking backwards for better lives, we could look forwards, and try to design something new. Maybe the answers are right in front of us and we refuse to use them--there are tons of meetups in NY I just haven't bothered to go to despite wanting to get out more. Maybe I just need higher pay.

[Unstoppable Empire of Doom]

I've said it on here before, and I'll say it again.

The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

More time spent working. More stress. Less happiness. Humans were built to hunt the forests and fields. We were meant to see the stars at night. We were meant to die before Alzheimer's and senility set in. I know it's not a popular opinion. It's also irrelevant as we no longer really have a choice.

[Cekoviu]

I've said it on here before, and I'll say it again.

The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

More time spent working. More stress. Less happiness. Humans were built to hunt the forests and fields. We were meant to see the stars at night. We were meant to die before Alzheimer's and senility set in. I know it's not a popular opinion. It's also irrelevant as we no longer really have a choice.

Humans weren't "meant to" do anything; we were not designed.

[Novus America]

I've said it on here before, and I'll say it again.

The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

More time spent working. More stress. Less happiness. Humans were built to hunt the forests and fields. We were meant to see the stars at night. We were meant to die before Alzheimer's and senility set in. I know it's not a popular opinion. It's also irrelevant as we no longer really have a choice.

Extremely dubious. The “more time working” is based on selective bias, it includes all ancillary work of the modern world, but only the time hunting in the primitive times.
And more stress?
BS.

Pretty sure not knowing where you next meal will come from is pretty damn stressful.
Never knowing when the “gods” will deliver some horrible punishment on them (natural disasters and diseases).

Primitive societies live in perpetual superstitious terror.

[Salus Maior]

This has been addressed but, also, in the alternate telling I quoted the idea the inhabitants were Orcs is just propaganda where history is told by the victor and, to that point..



No shit Sherlock, as they say, it’s from The Last Ringbearer.

Oh, is that the shitty Soviet retelling of Tolkien’s work that obviously didn’t understand what he was trying to tell?

[Ethel mermania]

I've said it on here before, and I'll say it again.

The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

More time spent working. More stress. Less happiness. Humans were built to hunt the forests and fields. We were meant to see the stars at night. We were meant to die before Alzheimer's and senility set in. I know it's not a popular opinion. It's also irrelevant as we no longer really have a choice.

Dentistry wins

[Salus Maior]

I've said it on here before, and I'll say it again.



More time spent working. More stress. Less happiness. Humans were built to hunt the forests and fields. We were meant to see the stars at night. We were meant to die before Alzheimer's and senility set in. I know it's not a popular opinion. It's also irrelevant as we no longer really have a choice.

Dentistry wins

Dentistry wasn’t really all that necessary until we started putting sugar into everything.

[The Archregimancy]

Dentistry wins

Dentistry wasn’t really all that necessary until we started putting sugar into everything.

Not entirely true; or rather, an exagerration.

Tooth decay wasn't really a significant problem until sugar became widely accessible; but on the other hand, tooth wear was far more significant a problem in the ancient world than today.

Take this cheery little abstract from a British Dental Journal paper on 'Dental Health and Disease in Ancient Egypt':

In ancient Egypt the exceptionally dry climate together with the unique burial customs has resulted in the survival of large numbers of well-preserved skeletal and mummified remains. Examinations of these remains together with an analysis of the surviving documentary, archaeological and ethnographic evidence has enabled a detailed picture of the dental health of these ancient people to be revealed, perhaps more so than for any other civilisation in antiquity. In this, the first of two articles, the dental pathological conditions that afflicted the ancient Egyptians is considered. The commonest finding is that of tooth wear, which was often so excessive that it resulted in pulpal exposure. Multiple abscesses were frequently seen, but caries was not a significant problem. Overall the findings indicate that the various pathological conditions and non-pathological abnormalities of teeth evident in dentitions in the twenty-first century were also manifest in ancient Egypt, although the incidences of these conditions varies considerably between the civilisations.

An earlier BDJ paper on 'the practice of dentistry in ancient Egypt' concluded that:

The conclusion would suggest that operative dental treatment if it did exist at all was extremely limited. The dental treatment that appears to have been provided was mainly restricted to pharmaceutical preparations that were either applied to the gingival and mucosal tissues or used as mouthwashes, and these at best may only have provided some short term relief. It seems apparent that many ancient Egyptians suffered from widespread and painful dental disease, which the available treatments can have done relatively little to alleviate.

Summed up, dentistry wasn't an established separate profession in ancient Egypt, but that doesn't mean it wasn't necessary; it's just that the focus was on different dental conditions than those that are common today in the industrialised west.

[Salandriagado]

I've said it on here before, and I'll say it again.



More time spent working. More stress. Less happiness. Humans were built to hunt the forests and fields. We were meant to see the stars at night. We were meant to die before Alzheimer's and senility set in. I know it's not a popular opinion. It's also irrelevant as we no longer really have a choice.

Extremely dubious. The “more time working” is based on selective bias, it includes all ancillary work of the modern world, but only the time hunting in the primitive times.

Really? Because the figures that I remember see are quite the opposite: the modern figures only include paid work, but the "ancient" figures include a whole bunch of stuff that we don't include as work these days.

[Cekoviu]

Dentistry wasn’t really all that necessary until we started putting sugar into everything.

Not entirely true; or rather, an exagerration.

Tooth decay wasn't really a significant problem until sugar became widely accessible; but on the other hand, tooth wear was far more significant a problem in the ancient world than today.

Take this cheery little abstract from a British Dental Journal paper on 'Dental Health and Disease in Ancient Egypt':

In ancient Egypt the exceptionally dry climate together with the unique burial customs has resulted in the survival of large numbers of well-preserved skeletal and mummified remains. Examinations of these remains together with an analysis of the surviving documentary, archaeological and ethnographic evidence has enabled a detailed picture of the dental health of these ancient people to be revealed, perhaps more so than for any other civilisation in antiquity. In this, the first of two articles, the dental pathological conditions that afflicted the ancient Egyptians is considered. The commonest finding is that of tooth wear, which was often so excessive that it resulted in pulpal exposure. Multiple abscesses were frequently seen, but caries was not a significant problem. Overall the findings indicate that the various pathological conditions and non-pathological abnormalities of teeth evident in dentitions in the twenty-first century were also manifest in ancient Egypt, although the incidences of these conditions varies considerably between the civilisations.

An earlier BDJ paper on 'the practice of dentistry in ancient Egypt' concluded that:

The conclusion would suggest that operative dental treatment if it did exist at all was extremely limited. The dental treatment that appears to have been provided was mainly restricted to pharmaceutical preparations that were either applied to the gingival and mucosal tissues or used as mouthwashes, and these at best may only have provided some short term relief. It seems apparent that many ancient Egyptians suffered from widespread and painful dental disease, which the available treatments can have done relatively little to alleviate.

Summed up, dentistry wasn't an established separate profession in ancient Egypt, but that doesn't mean it wasn't necessary; it's just that the focus was on different dental conditions than those that are common today in the industrialised west.

Is this something specific to ancient Egyptian culture? That is, do we see similar trends in humans elsewhere at the time or could Egyptians have had a weird diet?

[Novus America]

Extremely dubious. The “more time working” is based on selective bias, it includes all ancillary work of the modern world, but only the time hunting in the primitive times.

Really? Because the figures that I remember see are quite the opposite: the modern figures only include paid work, but the "ancient" figures include a whole bunch of stuff that we don't include as work these days.

Well that is kind of the point. Because you can really arbitrarily rig the numbers to create any result you like.

Because there is no objective measurement.

[Bombadil]

Not entirely true; or rather, an exagerration.

Tooth decay wasn't really a significant problem until sugar became widely accessible; but on the other hand, tooth wear was far more significant a problem in the ancient world than today.

Take this cheery little abstract from a British Dental Journal paper on 'Dental Health and Disease in Ancient Egypt':



An earlier BDJ paper on 'the practice of dentistry in ancient Egypt' concluded that:



Summed up, dentistry wasn't an established separate profession in ancient Egypt, but that doesn't mean it wasn't necessary; it's just that the focus was on different dental conditions than those that are common today in the industrialised west.

Is this something specific to ancient Egyptian culture? That is, do we see similar trends in humans elsewhere at the time or could Egyptians have had a weird diet?

Seems so..

The most common dental affliction in ancient Egypt was Attrition. This was caused by their diet of uncooked vegetables and lack of necessary vitamins and minerals. Archaeologists have previously discovered skulls and jaws in burial shafts and tombs, that all show signs of the disease. If untreated it could lead to abscesses, inflammation of the jawbone and gums and tooth loss.

As previously mentioned, the Egyptians had bad dental hygiene. This was partly due to their bread having grit and sand in it, which wore away their enamel. Whilst they hadn’t established dentistry, they did create the world’s oldest known formula for toothpaste. They would crush rock, mint, salt, pepper and dried iris flower to create a tooth cleaning powder. However, the concoction is now known to have caused bleeding gums.

Anyway, Ancient Egyptians aren't pre-Neolithic, who had absolutely shiny gnashers.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Is this something specific to ancient Egyptian culture? That is, do we see similar trends in humans elsewhere at the time or could Egyptians have had a weird diet?

Seems so..

The most common dental affliction in ancient Egypt was Attrition. This was caused by their diet of uncooked vegetables and lack of necessary vitamins and minerals. Archaeologists have previously discovered skulls and jaws in burial shafts and tombs, that all show signs of the disease. If untreated it could lead to abscesses, inflammation of the jawbone and gums and tooth loss.

As previously mentioned, the Egyptians had bad dental hygiene. This was partly due to their bread having grit and sand in it, which wore away their enamel. Whilst they hadn’t established dentistry, they did create the world’s oldest known formula for toothpaste. They would crush rock, mint, salt, pepper and dried iris flower to create a tooth cleaning powder. However, the concoction is now known to have caused bleeding gums.

Anyway, Ancient Egyptians aren't pre-Neolithic, who had absolutely shiny gnashers.

That surprises me. Whenever I go camping I eat my share of grit and sand. Maybe I'm just not very good at it?

[Bombadil]

Seems so..

The most common dental affliction in ancient Egypt was Attrition. This was caused by their diet of uncooked vegetables and lack of necessary vitamins and minerals. Archaeologists have previously discovered skulls and jaws in burial shafts and tombs, that all show signs of the disease. If untreated it could lead to abscesses, inflammation of the jawbone and gums and tooth loss.

As previously mentioned, the Egyptians had bad dental hygiene. This was partly due to their bread having grit and sand in it, which wore away their enamel. Whilst they hadn’t established dentistry, they did create the world’s oldest known formula for toothpaste. They would crush rock, mint, salt, pepper and dried iris flower to create a tooth cleaning powder. However, the concoction is now known to have caused bleeding gums.

Anyway, Ancient Egyptians aren't pre-Neolithic, who had absolutely shiny gnashers.

That surprises me. Whenever I go camping I eat my share of grit and sand. Maybe I'm just not very good at it?

Maybe they didn't only eat gritsand bread on their camping holidays. Of course they did love their camping as evidenced by their homage to tents in terms of those massive pyramids.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

That surprises me. Whenever I go camping I eat my share of grit and sand. Maybe I'm just not very good at it?

Maybe they didn't only eat gritsand bread on their camping holidays. Of course they did love their camping as evidenced by their homage to tents in terms of those massive pyramids.

When you have banana leaves or similar, you can wrap food in it to cook directly in the fire. The Australian Aborigines didn't generally have that so they just put animals and vegetables directly in the fire. Sand does get in the food.

Then there are pots. Do those fit in before or after nomads became settlers?

[Bombadil]

Maybe they didn't only eat gritsand bread on their camping holidays. Of course they did love their camping as evidenced by their homage to tents in terms of those massive pyramids.

When you have banana leaves or similar, you can wrap food in it to cook directly in the fire. The Australian Aborigines didn't generally have that so they just put animals and vegetables directly in the fire. Sand does get in the food.

Then there are pots. Do those fit in before or after nomads became settlers?

The pots predate plant domestication and agriculture in the area by at least 4,000 years.

Link

Apparently they were 'invented' separately in East Asia and then in North Africa. Honestly I'd be surprised if there's animals that don't use a form of pot, isn't there some video of a lobster or something moving a coconut around for some purpose.. in googling I found this..

Primatologist Tiago Falótico of the University of São Paulo, Proffitt and their colleagues recovered 122 capuchin stone artifacts from four sediment layers. Radiocarbon dating of charred wood bits in each layer provided age estimates for the finds. Excavated tools consisted of partial and complete pounding stones, rocks used as platforms on which to pound objects, and pieces of rock that detached from pounding stones and platforms during use.

Link

Though the first result for googling 'do monkeys use pots' resulted in..

The question of whether marijuana is physically addictive has been troubling researchers for years--but the latest evidence suggests that lab monkeys, at least, are easily hooked.

For the first time, scientists in the US have shown that monkeys will seek out the active chemical in cannabis just as they would with cocaine or morphine. The finding has created an uproar over the implications for humans who smoke pot.

..though not an uproar over hooking monkey's on pot, cocaine and morphine.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

When you have banana leaves or similar, you can wrap food in it to cook directly in the fire. The Australian Aborigines didn't generally have that so they just put animals and vegetables directly in the fire. Sand does get in the food.

Then there are pots. Do those fit in before or after nomads became settlers?

The pots predate plant domestication and agriculture in the area by at least 4,000 years.

Link

Apparently they were 'invented' separately in East Asia and then in North Africa. Honestly I'd be surprised if there's animals that don't use a form of pot, isn't there some video of a lobster or something moving a coconut around for some purpose.. in googling I found this..

Primatologist Tiago Falótico of the University of São Paulo, Proffitt and their colleagues recovered 122 capuchin stone artifacts from four sediment layers. Radiocarbon dating of charred wood bits in each layer provided age estimates for the finds. Excavated tools consisted of partial and complete pounding stones, rocks used as platforms on which to pound objects, and pieces of rock that detached from pounding stones and platforms during use.

Link

Though I doubt they would carry pots on long journeys. Too heavy. Maybe a good cutting stone would be worth carrying (in fact, carry extras for trade).

I'm getting a rather pleasant impression of arriving at a grassy river bank and finding the tools left behind from last time you stayed there. Even if you do need to make new pots.

[Kowani]

The pots predate plant domestication and agriculture in the area by at least 4,000 years.

Link

Apparently they were 'invented' separately in East Asia and then in North Africa. Honestly I'd be surprised if there's animals that don't use a form of pot, isn't there some video of a lobster or something moving a coconut around for some purpose.. in googling I found this..

Primatologist Tiago Falótico of the University of São Paulo, Proffitt and their colleagues recovered 122 capuchin stone artifacts from four sediment layers. Radiocarbon dating of charred wood bits in each layer provided age estimates for the finds. Excavated tools consisted of partial and complete pounding stones, rocks used as platforms on which to pound objects, and pieces of rock that detached from pounding stones and platforms during use.

Link

Though I doubt they would carry pots on long journeys. Too heavy. Maybe a good cutting stone would be worth carrying (in fact, carry extras for trade).

I'm getting a rather pleasant impression of arriving at a grassy river bank and finding the tools left behind from last time you stayed there. Even if you do need to make new pots.

Assuming they haven’t been taken by anyone else, destroyed by forces of nature, used as homes for animals…

Like, there’s a reason having a stable home is so beneficial.

[Ultimate Destructive Fighting Nation]

This, then, was the yeast on which Barad-Dur rose six centuries ago, that amazing city of alchemists and poets, mechanics and astronomers, philosophers and physicians, the heart of the only civilization in Middle Earth to bet on rational knowledge and bravely pitch its barely adolescent technology against ancient magic. The shining tower of the Barad-Dur citadel rose over the plains of Mordor almost as high as Orodruin like a monument to Man – free Man who had politely but firmly declined the guardianship of the Dwellers on High and started living by his own reason. It was a challenge to the bone-headed aggressive West, which was still picking lice in its log ‘castles’ to the monotonous chanting of scalds extolling the wonders of never-existing Númenor.

One thing I've noted is that, in general, we tend to champion the natural, the rural, the world of superstition and magic, we support farm boy Luke and his merry band of rapscallions against the orderly, technologically advanced Empire, and we support the farm boy Frodo against the majesty of Mordor, hell we support the cyber farm boy Neo over the happy world of the Matrix.

How far back do we need to go here.

Well one debate is that the transition to the Neolithic period was human's greatest mistake. We moved from the flexibility and idyll of hunter gatherer societies into cereal and animal husbandry - and just to stave off comments: husbandry; noun: the care, cultivation, and breeding of crops and animals.

Not marrying animals.

Anyway, the Neolithic period brought some ills to us all.. for one the increased closeness of living space both with humans and animals meant the increased state of disease, both in passing from animals to humans and also spreading within human communities. It also likely came with the advent of famine given the inflexibility of simply packing up and moving elsewhere. Religion, as opposed to superstition, is likely to occur with community structures. Even the very modification of food and animals helped create issues such as tooth decay (wisdom teeth are an issue of moving to softer food), obesity, heart disease.. let alone the ability to vastly increase population and therefore wreak havoc on the environment, possibly to our own destruction.

On the plus side it led to accessible porn by wifi, anywhere, anytime.

So, wise denizens of NSG.. was the transition to the Neolithic period ultimately a boon or bust for humanity and the world in general, or do the advantages outweigh the dis.. do you stand with Frodo and his unkempt band of ragamuffins and wizards or do you move into a spacious apartment in Barad-dur with air conditioning and wi-fi and all the other benefits of technological advancement brought by communal living?

As usual, no nuance please, this is NSG, it's one or the other.

Well, I would be pleased if I had sole.control over the Earth. Why not ? I am introducing “Christianity “ o the people. The world some day will be for me to rule lock, stock and barrel. Begin your praise to the King, Jesus Christ !!!

[Nobel Hobos 2]

This, then, was the yeast on which Barad-Dur rose six centuries ago, that amazing city of alchemists and poets, mechanics and astronomers, philosophers and physicians, the heart of the only civilization in Middle Earth to bet on rational knowledge and bravely pitch its barely adolescent technology against ancient magic. The shining tower of the Barad-Dur citadel rose over the plains of Mordor almost as high as Orodruin like a monument to Man – free Man who had politely but firmly declined the guardianship of the Dwellers on High and started living by his own reason. It was a challenge to the bone-headed aggressive West, which was still picking lice in its log ‘castles’ to the monotonous chanting of scalds extolling the wonders of never-existing Númenor.

One thing I've noted is that, in general, we tend to champion the natural, the rural, the world of superstition and magic, we support farm boy Luke and his merry band of rapscallions against the orderly, technologically advanced Empire, and we support the farm boy Frodo against the majesty of Mordor, hell we support the cyber farm boy Neo over the happy world of the Matrix.

How far back do we need to go here.

Well one debate is that the transition to the Neolithic period was human's greatest mistake. We moved from the flexibility and idyll of hunter gatherer societies into cereal and animal husbandry - and just to stave off comments: husbandry; noun: the care, cultivation, and breeding of crops and animals.

Not marrying animals.

Anyway, the Neolithic period brought some ills to us all.. for one the increased closeness of living space both with humans and animals meant the increased state of disease, both in passing from animals to humans and also spreading within human communities. It also likely came with the advent of famine given the inflexibility of simply packing up and moving elsewhere. Religion, as opposed to superstition, is likely to occur with community structures. Even the very modification of food and animals helped create issues such as tooth decay (wisdom teeth are an issue of moving to softer food), obesity, heart disease.. let alone the ability to vastly increase population and therefore wreak havoc on the environment, possibly to our own destruction.

On the plus side it led to accessible porn by wifi, anywhere, anytime.

So, wise denizens of NSG.. was the transition to the Neolithic period ultimately a boon or bust for humanity and the world in general, or do the advantages outweigh the dis.. do you stand with Frodo and his unkempt band of ragamuffins and wizards or do you move into a spacious apartment in Barad-dur with air conditioning and wi-fi and all the other benefits of technological advancement brought by communal living?

As usual, no nuance please, this is NSG, it's one or the other.

Well, I would be pleased if I had sole.control over the Earth. Why not ? I am introducing “Christianity “ o the people. The world some day will be for me to rule lock, stock and barrel. Begin your praise to the King, Jesus Christ !!!

I'm not the OP, but I happen to be here, so I will welcome you to the thread.

There is some humour here, but I think you should read the first page to get an idea of the factual basis that humour can be based on.

Funnies are always funnier if they're a bit true, wouldn't you agree?

[Grenartia]

Well, I would be pleased if I had sole.control over the Earth. Why not ? I am introducing “Christianity “ o the people. The world some day will be for me to rule lock, stock and barrel. Begin your praise to the King, Jesus Christ !!!

Cool story bro.

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Though I doubt they would carry pots on long journeys. Too heavy. Maybe a good cutting stone would be worth carrying (in fact, carry extras for trade).

I'm getting a rather pleasant impression of arriving at a grassy river bank and finding the tools left behind from last time you stayed there. Even if you do need to make new pots.

Assuming they haven’t been taken by anyone else, destroyed by forces of nature, used as homes for animals…

Like, there’s a reason having a stable home is so beneficial.

Pots as I understand it, could be fired ... firing clay is putting it in an ordinary fire, though some skill is required not to overheat it.

Then we have cutting and cutting-board stones. The former could be very valuable if the local stone does not include those hard stones which shatter at acute angles, these would be carried. Flat stones suitable for cutting or pounding on would not be worth carrying. But either kind would last essentially forever if left out in the open.

Now some other things, strong sticks to build a shelter, and reserves of firewood. I expect those would last several years out in the open. Hides for building shelter would be marginally worth carrying, they probably had more of them than they could carry, but perhaps salting them or treating them with some herb would prevent wild animals from eating them if left behind.

The advantages of settlement are (a) having a lot more stuff than you can carry, (b) keeping animals away from your growing food, (c) keeping predators away from your animals.

[Bombadil]

The advantages of settlement are (a) having a lot more stuff than you can carry, (b) keeping animals away from your growing food, (c) keeping predators away from your animals.

Well, in pre-neolithic times these are irrelevant.

For a, the whole collecting of things for your home is the start of the downward trend of consumerism, social classes, property and etc., we were freer when we weren't held down with.. 'things'.
For b, we merely plucked our food from the great garden of eden that was pre-neolithic times, but essentially had no growing food to protect since we gathered, we didn't grow.
Similarly we didn't keep animals for c, we lived in harmony with them in the great circle of life, occasionally eating them as part of that circle.