Why the world is a better place than before

[Arrian]

I didn't mean for it to make sense. I meant for you to see what I have had to deal with in this thread.

Ah. Nice try, but it bears little resemblence to what you've been dealing with in this thread.

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian


This sounds a helluva lot more likely and logical than category #1 (religion). Still, even if religion played a role (which still seems odd to me), it is but one of the three categories.

-Arrian

Religion has played a part in all cases. It doesn't matter what created the spark. The development of religion coincided with the development of society.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian


Ah. Nice try, but it bears little resemblence to what you've been dealing with in this thread.

-Arrian

Yeah, that's just BS. It is perfect resemblence to Imrans crap. Kontiki I will forgive, but it's still similar.

[Arrian]

I was obviously refering to the societies who were living in harmony with nature relatively speaking compared to others that were not. Should that be so hard to assume?

Getting back to this, yes. Nothing you wrote in this thread gave me any reason to believe you were aware of the stuff Kontiki mentioned. He brought it up as a counterpoint and you went all "OMG you guys are nuts, I knew that already duh!" on him.

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian


Getting back to this, yes. Nothing you wrote in this thread gave me any reason to believe you were aware of the stuff Kontiki mentioned. He brought it up as a counterpoint and you went all "OMG you guys are nuts, I knew that already duh!" on him.

-Arrian

The thing is that it is not a counterpoint. That's what I am talking about.

[Arrian]

This is an interesting link... Diamond, btw, is the guy who wrote Guns, Germs and Steel. Harlan is also mentioned.

edit: doh, it didn't past properly. I hang on...

http://www.unl.edu/rhames/courses/orig_agri_tur.html

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

what link?

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Kidicious


The thing is that it is not a counterpoint. That's what I am talking about.

You asserted that:

1) h/g's lived in harmony with nature; and
2) religion caused the neolithic revolution

Kontiki brought up evidence that wasn't so - that at least some h/g societies overhunted game to the point of extinction and thus shifted to farming.

Then you say I KNEW THAT! and claim it's not a counterpoint.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

http://www.handels.gu.se/epc/archive/00002286/01/gunwpe0057.pdf

I haven't read it all yet, but it seems on-topic...

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian


You asserted that:

1) h/g's lived in harmony with nature; and
2) religion caused the neolithic revolution

Kontiki brought up evidence that wasn't so - that at least some h/g societies overhunted game to the point of extinction and thus shifted to farming.

Then you say I KNEW THAT! and claim it's not a counterpoint.

-Arrian

I think first he called what I had said horse ****. To me that is suppose to mean that what I said was not true. When generally it is.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian

http://www.handels.gu.se/epc/archive/00002286/01/gunwpe0057.pdf

I haven't read it all yet, but it seems on-topic...

-Arrian

You realize that that is part of "Working Papers in Economics." I don't expect them to think religion causes anything.

[Arrian]

Under section 4.3. of that link, they discuss possible cultural reasons for the adoption of agriculture/domestication of animals, including religion.

There are, of course, discussions of many other (non-cultural) reasons. Suffice it to say I find those more likely.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Kidicious


You realize that that is part of "Working Papers of Economics." I don't expect them to think religion causes anything.

It's also a lengthy, footnoted text discussing precisely what we're discussing.

And, as I noted in my last post, they do specifically address the cultural hypothesis. I only skimmed it, because I'm about to leave, but it was not dismissed out of hand. I don't think it was dismissed at all, actually. Basically, it's impossible to verify.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

I think first he called what I had said horse ****. To me that is suppose to mean that what I said was not true. When generally it is.

Last comment before I adjourn for the weekend...

He contested your assertions, provided a basis for his disagreement, and you then said "I KNEW THAT" and then moved straight on to "I'M RIGHT."

That doesn't work.

Anyway, have a good weekend.

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

You too.