64 ms·

Lucretian Prehistory: An Epicurean view of the pros and cons of civilization

22 points by diodorus 7y ago

briga 7y ago
For a 2000 year old poem, De rerum natura offers a surprisingly scientific take on the world, as well as a fascinating insight into what was going on at the edge on Roman thought at the time. It's still a great and fairly accessible read, and if reading ancient poems is your thing I'd recommend the Rolfe Humphries translation.
- jfengel 7y ago
  Indeed. Lucretius is often credited for his prescient understanding of "atoms", but that's really a red herring. His view of atoms isn't all that similar to the 19th century atomic theory, and even less to modern atomic theory. What he really had going for him was empricism. The win was the notion that the universe is governed by a small set of physical laws, and that we can understand those laws. The sun and moon operate by the same principles as our bodies do. He anticipated what this would mean for free will, and cobbled in a "swerve" to allow for it. But it was still a world dominated by natural forces, not supernatural ones, in which science could be a thing.
Merrill 7y ago
Whether pre-agricultural societies were generally peaceful is a matter of some debate. If they were, it is probably because disease, accident and predators kept the population in balance with resources. See, for example, "Resource scarcity drives lethal aggression among prehistoric hunter-gatherers in central California" at https://www.pnas.org/content/113/43/12120 https://www.pnas.org/content/113/43/12120 >Results reveal that sharp force trauma, the most common form of violence in the record, is better predicted by resource scarcity than relative sociopolitical complexity. Blunt force cranial trauma shows no correlation with mean net primary productivity or political complexity and may reflect a different form of close contact violence. This study provides no support for the position that violence originated with the development of more complex hunter-gatherer adaptations in the fairly recent past. Instead, findings show that individuals are prone to violence in times and places of resource scarcity.
- ptah 7y ago
  they were more peaceful in the sense that violence was individual and local to a large extent whereas once metals were introduced incidents took on a larger scale according to the article
Zigurd 7y ago
Just as the Greeks thought they lived comfortably compared to their image of naked foragers in the wilderness, we have some misperceptions of our own advanced state. For example, a common mismeasurement of the misery of pre-industrial life is very low life expectancy. On average, you'll be dead at about 35 years. But that number is skewed by a very high infant and child mortality rate. If you make it to adulthood, you're still subject to lack of modern medicine, but you'll probably make it farther than 35. That sucks compared to present day low infant mortality, which has many benefits beyond just fewer dead children. But low infant mortality skews our view of the harshness of pre-industrial adult life. Relative comfort can impart smugness.
ricc 7y ago
This reminds me of Jared Diamond's article about humanity's biggest mistake...
ptah 7y ago
> But the search for power and gratification by the few at the expense of the many is an inevitable feature of civilization that could be better controlled than it is, even if it can never be banished once and for all. It's disappointing that there are no suggestions around how to better control this

22 points by diodorus 7y ago

For a 2000 year old poem, De rerum natura offers a surprisingly scientific take on the world, as well as a fascinating insight into what was going on at the edge on Roman thought at the time. It's still a great and fairly accessible read, and if reading ancient poems is your thing I'd recommend the Rolfe Humphries translation.

jfengel 7y ago
Indeed. Lucretius is often credited for his prescient understanding of "atoms", but that's really a red herring. His view of atoms isn't all that similar to the 19th century atomic theory, and even less to modern atomic theory. What he really had going for him was empricism. The win was the notion that the universe is governed by a small set of physical laws, and that we can understand those laws. The sun and moon operate by the same principles as our bodies do. He anticipated what this would mean for free will, and cobbled in a "swerve" to allow for it. But it was still a world dominated by natural forces, not supernatural ones, in which science could be a thing.

Merrill 7y ago

Whether pre-agricultural societies were generally peaceful is a matter of some debate. If they were, it is probably because disease, accident and predators kept the population in balance with resources. See, for example, "Resource scarcity drives lethal aggression among prehistoric hunter-gatherers in central California" at https://www.pnas.org/content/113/43/12120 https://www.pnas.org/content/113/43/12120 >Results reveal that sharp force trauma, the most common form of violence in the record, is better predicted by resource scarcity than relative sociopolitical complexity. Blunt force cranial trauma shows no correlation with mean net primary productivity or political complexity and may reflect a different form of close contact violence. This study provides no support for the position that violence originated with the development of more complex hunter-gatherer adaptations in the fairly recent past. Instead, findings show that individuals are prone to violence in times and places of resource scarcity.

ptah 7y ago
they were more peaceful in the sense that violence was individual and local to a large extent whereas once metals were introduced incidents took on a larger scale according to the article

Zigurd 7y ago

Just as the Greeks thought they lived comfortably compared to their image of naked foragers in the wilderness, we have some misperceptions of our own advanced state. For example, a common mismeasurement of the misery of pre-industrial life is very low life expectancy. On average, you'll be dead at about 35 years. But that number is skewed by a very high infant and child mortality rate. If you make it to adulthood, you're still subject to lack of modern medicine, but you'll probably make it farther than 35. That sucks compared to present day low infant mortality, which has many benefits beyond just fewer dead children. But low infant mortality skews our view of the harshness of pre-industrial adult life. Relative comfort can impart smugness.

ricc 7y ago

This reminds me of Jared Diamond's article about humanity's biggest mistake...

ptah 7y ago

> But the search for power and gratification by the few at the expense of the many is an inevitable feature of civilization that could be better controlled than it is, even if it can never be banished once and for all. It's disappointing that there are no suggestions around how to better control this