3 ms·

Your understanding of society is behind by about two or three centuries at least... It's supremely unscientific to use chimpanzee social dynamics to understand

Your understanding of society is behind by about two or three centuries at least... It's supremely unscientific to use chimpanzee social dynamics to understand human ones. And the standard view among anthropologists about prevalence of violence in a given community, is that it arises out of certain conditions (e.g. famine or other loss of resources, usually man-made by outsiders or despotic rulers), not because we are innately prone to just killing each other if there is no "leviathan" to stop us. Past research suggesting this kind of thing -- like the single study of a single tribe that you are giving us with your argument -- has been debunked by more nuanced, modern (and less colonial/racist) research. There are far more peaceful societies known to us than violent ones, though unfortunately we are mostly forced to participate in one of the latter.

hntrader 6y ago
It has zero to do with racist research (the same findings apply to historical Europe) and your assertions here are just factually wrong. Here's a study on middle ages Croatia where 20 percent of skeletons showed cranial fractures (which doesn't even include murder by flesh wounds): https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ajpa.22083 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ajpa.22083 Here's a study on London cemetaries which found a 7 percent rate (again this excludes murder by other methods): https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ajpa.23288 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ajpa.23288 "e.g. famine or other loss of resources, usually man-made by outsiders or despotic rulers" Demonstrably wrong in the case of the Waorani. It was a blood feud going back generations, long before any contact with other societies. So yes, a Leviathan would've stopped it. https://www.nature.com/news/2009/090511/full/news.2009.463.html https://www.nature.com/news/2009/090511/full/news.2009.463.h...
- fuzzfactor 6y ago
  >It was a blood feud going back generations, long before any contact with other societies. So culturally preserved hatred (which became an outlier over a period of time where other cultures preserved less hatred), not much different than the Hatfields & McCoys.

hntrader 6y ago

It has zero to do with racist research (the same findings apply to historical Europe) and your assertions here are just factually wrong. Here's a study on middle ages Croatia where 20 percent of skeletons showed cranial fractures (which doesn't even include murder by flesh wounds): https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ajpa.22083 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ajpa.22083 Here's a study on London cemetaries which found a 7 percent rate (again this excludes murder by other methods): https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ajpa.23288 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ajpa.23288 "e.g. famine or other loss of resources, usually man-made by outsiders or despotic rulers" Demonstrably wrong in the case of the Waorani. It was a blood feud going back generations, long before any contact with other societies. So yes, a Leviathan would've stopped it. https://www.nature.com/news/2009/090511/full/news.2009.463.html https://www.nature.com/news/2009/090511/full/news.2009.463.h...

fuzzfactor 6y ago
>It was a blood feud going back generations, long before any contact with other societies. So culturally preserved hatred (which became an outlier over a period of time where other cultures preserved less hatred), not much different than the Hatfields & McCoys.