Monganaut
|
Re: Mudlark finds Neolithic skull by Thames
Feb 23, 2019, 21:04
|
|
cheers for the link, will have a nose later.
|
Monganaut
|
Edited Feb 23, 2019, 22:02
Re: Mudlark finds Neolithic skull by Thames
Feb 23, 2019, 21:36
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number
This is quite interesting...it states approx 150 people as being the average number of a 'comfortable' population, the example given being people you wouldn't be embarrassed to have a drink with if you bumped into them. But of that group, 42% of the group is involved in 'social grooming', so maybe not so harmonic as we'd like. Can't remember where I got the 30 peeps number from...will try to find out...may have been something particularly pertaining to hunter/gatherer groups?
This is an interesting link too...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-gatherer
In regard to the Paleolithic art.....I don't know a whole lot about it, did a have a couple of interesting books by Paul G Bahn years ago (long since given away) with lots of lovely illustrations. And as a kid had a waste paper basket with the Lascaux horses colour printed on it (didn't every kid of this age have this bin in their bedroom? I remember at least a few friends having the same one :) (This is it....https://www.ebay.ie/itm/163289849851)
Anyhoo, I digress again, what I was gonna say is, I think it's in our nature to leave our mark, be that in ochre, stone or steel. I truly believe it's hard wired into us...something to do with our consciousness and awareness of our unique position in being able to influence our surroundings and the wider world at large (though more and more studies are finding a 'sentience' in many more animals and creatures, so what do I know ;)
edit..sure you've seen this, but if not looks interesting...
http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199551224.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199551224-e-053
|
Amil04
|
Edited Feb 24, 2019, 09:08
Re: Mudlark finds Neolithic skull by Thames
Feb 24, 2019, 09:06
|
Thirty to forty is a number I’ve heard time and time again regarding a viable group number. I suppose this could have been a ‘sweet spot’ and real numbers could have been lower or higher depending.
Juris Zarin’s led a team in the eighties doing some fascinating work trying to discover where ‘The Garden of Eden’ was, and indeed if in fact it was actually a real place. As has no doubt been said by others..eating from the tree of knowledge is referring at least in part to early agriculture.
https://youtu.be/oqyez-PXDiY
|
Monganaut
|
Re: Mudlark finds Neolithic skull by Thames
Feb 24, 2019, 16:53
|
Cheers for the link, will have a look later. Kinda enjoyed the last link you posted, but for the guys spoken delivery, which was very off putting, and had me zoning out occasionally (though to be fair, I was doing other things whilst listening).
Yeah, before that Dunbar study I think the general consensus was that moving and hunting tribes/bands size being more than 30 or 40 max, which is still a fairly large amount peeps clubbed together. Though I'm not sure if this is an Extrapolation of prehistoric tribes numbers, or bases on 'modern' hunter/gatherer tribe populations.
Excavations at Starr Carr has shown us that these bands were not always on the move, so I guess populations may have grown during these periods, then maybe split off into other bands when the populous got to big. If you find a sweet spot, it makes sense to hang around and hoover up the local resources. Indeed, studies have shown numerous bands staying put around the same lake, though I'm not sure they were all at the same time. Though if they were all hanging around, some interaction must have taken place, maybe even interbreeding etc..
|
Amil04
|
Edited Feb 24, 2019, 19:57
Re: Mudlark finds Neolithic skull by Thames
Feb 24, 2019, 19:37
|
Yes, David Bohm is particularly stuttery in that link! I don’t mind the odd stutter/false start but as you say it becomes off putting after a while. Get y’ words out man! Hesitation at least gives the listener the impression that he is actually thinking about what he’s saying on the spot. You may have seen from some of the recommends that he believes that there was some kind of ‘mistake’ in thought very early on in human development. He suggests it’s the same in some other primates. This mistake may not be basic..ie there’s a way out of it. I’ll not attempt to got into it further here except to say he says that the idea of a ‘thinker’ having thoughts, the ‘me’, is some what illusory..the structure of thought creates the notion of the me, but conceals what it’s doing. Actually...horses mouth.
https://youtu.be/emAeFuwtelQ
J. Krishnamurti discussed in above link was hailed in the twenties as the ‘world teacher’ we’d all been waiting for. He disbanded the organisation build up around him in mid life proclaiming “The truth is a pathless land”
I enjoy listening to both and in discussion with each other particularly. There’s a pleasing absence of ‘long words’ in discussions of a important nature. Thought.. trying to solve the worlds problems, when the very tool used is in its self fault. Thought pretends it’s not created all chaos in the world..and then sets out to solve all the problems! Yeah right.. I believe that’s what’s meant in the bible by “you don’t put new wine in old skins” not religious, but many truths in the old stories..
Are the answers answers to ‘big’ questions just too simple for us to take. Thought just wants to ‘carry on?’
A country isn’t a part ...it’s a fragment.
‘Hic’
|
