this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2023
539 points (87.8% liked)
Asklemmy
43968 readers
1546 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Interesting research to bring up, but I think there are a lot of valid points brought up against some of his and his colleagues’ work. Here’s a blog by someone who has the same politics as him: https://climateandcapitalism.com/2021/12/17/the-dawn-of-everything-gets-human-history-wrong/
Besides that I think some archeologists often fail to compare the boundary conditions under which past societal norms were shaped relative to those we have today. For example, it’s a lot easier to imagine an egalitarian structure to be acceptable amongst members of a community when we didn’t have that much skill difference or specialization, or when society was just you and your tribe. We have a lot more information, historical baggage and means of self-realization now. Tbh, I find some researchers divorced from reality (the kind of stuff that gives rise to realpolitiks) but maybe I am just stupid.