Why no monkey stories?(evolution)

by sleepy 33 Replies latest jw friends

Xander

How many people here think their immediate parents are not as technologically capable as them? Grandparents less so? Great-grandparents?
You don't think less of them though, do you? You wouldn't go on telling tales to your kids about how ignorant your grandparents were and how much superior you are know, would you?
Human speech developed the same way. It probably took hundreds, if not thousands of generations. One person looking back would not see such a disparity of capabilities to make stories about it.
So, each succeeding generation got more and more 'smart'. Not suddenly, but so gradually no one noticed. Why would stories be told of this?
Religion's creation tales only came about millenia later, when groups of men started looking for way to control other men. Enter an all-powerful god or gods to whom only a select few can talk to.
A fanatic is one who, upon losing sight of his goals, redoubles his efforts.
--George Santayana
siegswife

How did the few get the many to fall for it? Did they understand the way that mind control worked?
Maybe people that made discoveries were held in reverence...but why would they all have the desire to control others?
Do you think that people all over the world came up with similar schemes or did it all stem from one original tribe?
cellomould

As has been discussed, the branch of the human family from which we originated has obviously been continuous. There have been few breakthroughs in self-awareness, but rather it's been mostly a slow process.
I do believe that the subject matter upon which the tales in the Bible are based provides a very good snapshot of human evolution, especially the evolution of conciousness.
The part of this process which was rapid was not an increase in individual conciousness, but rather an increase in social conciousness.
The most pervasive theme in mythology is death. Humans have long misunderstood their place in the animal kingdom, due, among other reasons, to our high status on the food chain. We continue to think the rules for animals don't apply to us. Well, guess what? We die too.
I believe that, in actuality, all animals see their own world subjectively. They are the kings of their own universes.
It is so hard to unravel our social evolution because we assume first vast differences in thought processing between humans and other animals. We avoid asking the important questions.
cellomould
"In other words, your God is the warden of a prison where the only prisoner is your God." Jose Saramago, The Gospel According to Jesus Christ
cellomould

Siegswife,
We ascribe too much importance to 'who did it' or 'who discovered it'. But something that is innovative will persist and propogate, regardless of who first had the idea. It's really a function of the environment.
The same solutions often arise spontaneously and independently. An example is road building.
When I traveled to Peru, I wondered why the roads (well, really foot paths) built by the Incas were so similar to the pictures and drawings I saw (I admit primarily in WT literature) of biblical-era middle eastern roads. In both cases, you have a wall of stones lining the path on one side.
My question assumed their was no function to this wall. However, it would not be simply decorative.
So why build a stone road and a wall? That's a lot of work!
Well, early civilizations who didn't build walls along their roads wouldn't fare well. In the forests of the Andes or the wilderness areas of the eastern Mediterranean, a stone paved road without a wall is little better than a dirt path:
If no one passes over it for a while, the road will be lost due to vegetation or dust. So the wall is there to identify the path!
Does it seem like an incredible innovation now? It's not really an issue of a individual roadbuilder learning from his mistakes. Rather, the environment selected the roadbuilder (and thus his tribe) who may have seemed at the time to spend his resources (stones) too liberally.
cellomould
"In other words, your God is the warden of a prison where the only prisoner is your God." Jose Saramago, The Gospel According to Jesus Christ
sleepy

"Human speech developed the same way. It probably took hundreds, if not thousands of generations. One person looking back would not see such a disparity of capabilities to make stories about it."
For a sart we carnt know this as we werent there and there is no record of this.
Of course it could develope over time but when we see people today who through inherited mutation and such have a speech problem or any other mental problems ( which speech would be to a non speeker)it usually involves a big chuck of difference rather than small differences.
Take Autisum. Although people do have it to different degrees it is quite a major difference.This doesn't develope over thousands of years but you have it or you dont.
Can we really say these things took thousands of years without the proof?
Isn't only by employing a circuliar argument that we reach this conclustion?Saying that evolution as we understand it today is true therefore these things took thousands of years?
Also if speech did develope so slowly why is it so wide spread?Wouldn't different groups of humans through out the world have different speaking capabillities?
Not different languages as the same type of brain structure is used by all humans to understand speech.
How would speech be passed on to man through out the world unless they were all interbreading, which they couldn't do unless they all lived close together.
As to the stories of Gods and such, my point is not that they told these stories because they were clever enought to work out where they came from themselves but because were they told this by the said creatures?
Of course I am not saying any of this is true.I just like to look at different sides of the story.Only last night I was debating with a creationist as to the merits of evolution.
ChuckD

The subject of this thread notwithstanding, I did want to point out that your mention of the patent official saying something to the effect that "everything has been invented" is just an old wive's tale, and has no basis in fact.
Please have a look at;
http://www.ideafinder.com/resource/archives/wow-duell.htm
rem

Siegs,
How did the few get the many to fall for it? Did they understand the way that mind control worked?
Maybe people that made discoveries were held in reverence...but why would they all have the desire to control others?
Do you think that people all over the world came up with similar schemes or did it all stem from one original tribe?
Read "Guns Germs and Steel" by Jared Diamond. There seems to be a natural evolution of civilization all over the earth due to transition from hunter-gatherers to agricultural societies. This same pattern has been seen in many societies independent of each other in almost all of the continents.
Actually, most hunter gatherer groups have no real leader, but as populations grow there is a natural need for organization. Villages may have a "big man" who has no real "power" but the people listen to him because he is a bit more persuasive or charming. As agriculture is adopted, populations boom and heirarchies are organized. There is enough food for specialized rulers and other non-food producing jobs, so societies get more and more complex. Heirarchical religion seems to follow a parallel evolution with a more organized society as well, which also contributes to some having more power over others.
Of course, this is all well after language was already developed. That happened much earlier. Perhaps it took the same type of path of written language, which took a long time to evolve. At first, perhaps sounds were used to aid in hunting and other basic informational sounds. Definitely not enough to tell a story with! Over time the vocabulary grew, but we don't know how fast that happened. Early writing is similar - there was a small vocabulary of words that were mainly used for trading purposes. Early written languages did not have enough words to tell stories. Years later written language evolved to where we could have oral traditions recorded, such as the works of Homer and the earlier Sumerian writings.
My 2 cents,
rem
"We all do no end of feeling, and we mistake it for thinking." - Mark Twain
Xander

Maybe people that made discoveries were held in reverence...but why would they all have the desire to control others?
Not all did, but many did. And of those who wanted to control the same group, wars were fought. You've heard of religious wars, no? You don't think it's a product of this century alone do you?
Also if speech did develope so slowly why is it so wide spread?Wouldn't different groups of humans through out the world have different speaking capabillities?
Do you realize how silly this sound? Imagine, say, a world were people in North America mostly speak English. But, then, there is another continent - let's call it Africa - were people DON'T speak English, but a number of tribal dialects.
Are entire words and concepts missing from their language? YES! Is it obvious their language 'evolved' along different lines than the Romantic languages. Well, yeah.
For a sart we carnt know this as we werent there and there is no record of this.
True, I'm basing this on observation. Many animals today have some rudimentary form of communication. True, generally, it is limited to two concepts - 'Stay Away' and 'I'm really horny' - but some primates can be taught to 'talk' (sign language) fairly well.
I'm assuming human speech started from such simple origins, and, as we grew as a species, words and thoughts were added to the vocabulary.
Take Autisum. Although people do have it to different degrees it is quite a major difference.
Don't know why you keep bringing this up. Autism is a mental defect. Speech isn't - many (?most?) animals can do it. It is just the degree of information that can be communicated that changes.
A fanatic is one who, upon losing sight of his goals, redoubles his efforts.
--George Santayana
sleepy

Hi Xander.
Lets look at a few points.
"Also if speech did develope so slowly why is it so wide spread?Wouldn't different groups of humans through out the world have different speaking capabillities?
Do you realize how silly this sound? Imagine, say, a world were people in North America mostly speak English. But, then, there is another continent - let's call it Africa - were people DON'T speak English, but a number of tribal dialects.
Are entire words and concepts missing from their language? YES! Is it obvious their language 'evolved' along different lines than the Romantic languages. Well, yeah."
I think here we are confusing language and speech.
As far as I know you can take a human baby born to any race around the world and they will learn the language of their country.
Doesn't matter if its english french or Boga woga.
We all have the same structures in or brain to understand language.
To interperate gramma and sounds.
All humans have this same ability.
So language ability as we know had to be in place within human before they spread around the globe.
"I]Take Autisum. Although people do have it to different degrees it is quite a major difference.[/I]
Don't know why you keep bringing this up. Autism is a mental defect. Speech isn't - many (?most?) animals can do it. It is just the degree of information that can be communicated that changes."
What we call defects are what other call genetic change.
It is only a defect when it is of no use , if the defect is useful and can be passed on it is now an hereditary advantage.
The point is top show that these changes that can occour in the human brain are often large and have other side effects.
Although there are smaller differences that can occour we musn't ignore the fact that often small changes in brain stucture can have larger effects and also effect seamingly unrelated parts of the brain.
Can we really asume that laguage and other abilities has developed only slowly through time around the world when even today people are born with major defects or differences to their brain stucture?
siegswife

I just have to wonder what made people come up with the belief in a higher Spirit that they called the Creator.
If people created it strictly as a control feature, wouldn't it be easier for them to somehow assert that they themselves were some sort of god? The Egyptians used to think that their leaders were gods, yet they still believed they were incarnations of a higher life form.
It makes some sense if they were actually cognizant of evolution, and logically assumed that since their existence came about from lower species reaching a higher plateau, then men would eventually reach a higher point as well. I don't understand why they would 'create' a creator for the purpose of control. If I wanted to control someone, I would make them believe that I was the ultimate authority on everything. I wouldn't create something that gave what I wanted (control) to someone or something else.
And why would it be so easy for people to believe in God if they didn't have that inclination anyway?

Why no monkey stories?(evolution)

Share this