NC - thanks for replying
The concept of theft did not enter the picture until social contracts could be understood. This was a huge step for humans, and enable us to progress much more rapidly. If you need a tool, and you know it can simply be stolen, how much time would you spend making it? Not much. You'd pick up the first sharp rock and do your thing. But if you knew you could keep that rock, then you could become invested in it. You could learn flint knapping, and improve the design! Others would hear the banging as you worked the stone, but because you know there is a social contract not to take it, you could work on with confidence. And the whole group benefits from your work and any new design concepts.the social contracts you mention, how were they implemented and reinforced if not through community religion (this is what I have learned anyway in my study of parts of European civilisation)? I'd agree with you if you said that at one time kinship was the main vehicle for consolidating alliances but this too was governed by outside forces called gods which I would say encapsulates the idea of actions and their consequences (this part I agree with you but would go further and suggest is part of all experience provided we allow for the activities of the gods).
I agree with what you say about the development of culture but the gods were an enormous part of it.
Your ideas about the how the concept of theft was conceived only make sense if we apply the present to the past. Is this what you are doing? I want to clarify in case you have some ancient anthropological evidence that corroborates what you say? what I mean to say is that I don't know much about anthropology and would welcome what you have.
I don't mean to be combatitive even if my reply does sound like that. I really want to understand. However I do respect your personal opinion and if you want to leave it at that then fine with me.