What's the biological / evolutionary reason for laziness?

[Elok]

Er, Spiff?

When you use a hammer instead of a fist, it's because you'd bruise your hand like all hell and accomplish nothing otherwise. When you saw a tree instead of using your teeth, it's because you're not a beaver and trying to chew a tree down would only ruin your mouth. Tools allow us to do things we often couldn't do at all otherwise. They weren't an especially "lazy" solution, as early hominids tended to make new tools every time they arrived at a new location rather than carry the old ones around. If you're using the word lazy to mean not wasting energy for no reason, well, that's not its usual meaning.

Darius: Agriculture involves much, much, MUCH more work than hunting and gathering. Hunter-gatherers have no responsibilities beyond keeping up with the group and moving with the seasons. And they can't support a large population, but a high-protein diet tends to lower fertility and H-G peoples have various means of population control, such as breast-feeding for an unusually long time. Anyway, we switched to agriculture out of necessity, during a very long drought at the end of the ice age.

[Dis]

and I would respond with a long thought out dissertation on the subject, but I'm too lazy. I figured someone had to make that joke.

[Aeson]

They did, they just were too lazy to post it.

[Dis]

and I was too lazy to laugh at it.

[Lul Thyme]

Originally posted by Elok
Er, Spiff?

When you use a hammer instead of a fist, it's because you'd bruise your hand like all hell and accomplish nothing otherwise. When you saw a tree instead of using your teeth, it's because you're not a beaver and trying to chew a tree down would only ruin your mouth. Tools allow us to do things we often couldn't do at all otherwise. They weren't an especially "lazy" solution, as early hominids tended to make new tools every time they arrived at a new location rather than carry the old ones around. If you're using the word lazy to mean not wasting energy for no reason, well, that's not its usual meaning.

Why can't you chew a tree with your teeth?

Are you the kind of person that things no matter how many drops of water that never makes a flood?

Say diameter half an inch, how long does that take.
Ok how about an inch, I'm sure I can chew that in a day.
Ok how about 2 inches, I'm pretty sure I can do it in a few days.
etc...
Of course it would take a long time and effort that's his point...

anyway, it would be quicker with a saw for sure.

You took his point too litteraly.
His point was : tools save effort.

If you want to argue that they also allow us to do things we couldn't do at all then sure, but it's also true that they allow things we could do with great effort to be done much more easily.

What's the usual meaning of the word lazy btw?
It has a negative connotation but only from the outside.
It's a negative way of saying that somebody finds a particular task is not worth the effort.

[chequita guevara]

conservation of energy, though maybe someone already wrote that but i'm too lazy to read the thread first

[Dis]

I'll elaborate for those too lazy to comprehend. All these ideas have already been presented, but I want to provide an example.

For example. My house needs painting. I'm too lazy to do it. There is no biological need for me to do it. I still have shelter (no leaks), I have food, water and all the basic human needs. There are valid reasons to do it. To protect the wood, and protect my investment. This is where the brain needs to overcome the desire to rest.

So far, that hasn't happened.

[Cort Haus]

I can see another two possible questions here - 'what's the theological explaination for laziness' (is it a sin or a gift from God) and another asking 'what's procrastination all about then? (why do some of us do it)'.

[Cort Haus]

Sell your house, Dis. That'll make you want to paint it, as you'll need the full value to buy the next one.

[Lord Avalon]

Originally posted by Elok
Darius: Agriculture involves much, much, MUCH more work than hunting and gathering. Hunter-gatherers have no responsibilities beyond keeping up with the group and moving with the seasons. And they can't support a large population, but a high-protein diet tends to lower fertility and H-G peoples have various means of population control, such as breast-feeding for an unusually long time. Anyway, we switched to agriculture out of necessity, during a very long drought at the end of the ice age.

But does it really involve more work per unit of food? Agri yields a lot more food than H&G, especially with domesticated animals to help. So IIRC GG&S asserts that an agri society can support people who don't farm, like warriors, so it can go forth and conquer. H&G people have to be H&G just about all the time. They don't have time for extended war. Also nonfarmers could be bureaucrats (to help govern a larger society) or artists or inventors or artisans. Therefore agri > H&G.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Elok
Darius: Agriculture involves much, much, MUCH more work than hunting and gathering. Hunter-gatherers have no responsibilities beyond keeping up with the group and moving with the seasons. And they can't support a large population, but a high-protein diet tends to lower fertility and H-G peoples have various means of population control, such as breast-feeding for an unusually long time. Anyway, we switched to agriculture out of necessity, during a very long drought at the end of the ice age.

I bolded the important part - agriculture was an inevitable result of climate change, so laziness would have been irrelevant.

Edit: and what Avalon said.

[Cort Haus]

What kind of a communist are you? Part II

Originally posted by Spiffor
Human history started long before capitalism, thankfully.

Re-reading the thread, I've got to flag this.

Capitalism has been a progressive development over earlier forms of production. FACT. There's no communism without advanced capitalism. Marx was very clear on this, and FWIW history bears it out.

I remind you of this because it sounds like you think that the development of capitalism is a bad thing, rather than a necessary stage on the road to communism, as every self-respecting Marxist knows.

If human history had started only shortly before capitalism, we'd probably be at an advanced stage of communist wealth beyond our dreams by now.

[Elok]

Yeah, you can't do anything but hunt and gather if you hunt and gather, but then, why would they want to? They were quite content just living on the go until they had no other choice. When that happened, the population burgeoned-partly because of the jump in food supply, partly because of the shift away from a high-protein diet, and partly because children are more useful on a farm than they are in an H-G society, so people had more of them. And from that point on, people couldn't go back unless a big chunk of them were to suddenly die. Thus came civilization...at least, that's what I was taught in my Archaeology class a year or so back.

I just felt I had to argue against what looked like the stupid myth that a sedentary existence was much easier than hunting and gathering. I'm not saying we'd be better off if we'd stuck to wandering around chasing the herds with atlatls. We'd be dead if we had.

EDIT: LT, are you joking? Assuming you could strip away the bark, you'd still break your teeth trying to take a bite out of a tree. Humans don't have the jaw muscles and ever-growing teeth of a rodent, or the handy digging-claws of a badger, or the prehensile tail of a monkey, which is why we need saws and shovels and rope. Tools are a plain necessity of our condition, and have been since we came out of the trees.

[Dis]

I think it's easier in that they probably had better shelter (as in more permanent) in an ag society than a h/g one.

[Elok]

You'd be surprised. Early homo sapiens kept a variety of seasonal camps in various places, and rotated throughout the year. There's an excellent specimen in...I think it's called Catal Huyuk, Turkey. Pronounced "SHAH-tle WHO-yuck." It wasn't a permanent house, but it was shelter enough. Which is not to say that we'd be happier as nomads, but in terms of the effort required just to maintain one's existence it was pretty sweet.