Several generations after humans began using fire there arose an activist anti-fire movement. Its participants explained that the use of fire offers many benefits, but the benefits come at a high price. Careless use of fire has resulted in entire villages being burned to the ground. If you ever witnessed a person being burned to death you would understand the evil that is fire. For at least 97% of human existence we have lived without fire. Fire is an unnecessary burden that should be eradicated.
{If there was a Feminist movement during that era, they would probably explain to us how fire is more harmful to women than it is to men and that anyone who supports the use of fire is a misogynist who lacks empathy}
Obviously, any newly implemented system is going to have existed for a very short percentage of the total time. As time goes by that percentage becomes greater.
If the human race persists for another 90 million years, then it would accurate to claim that we have lived by our current system for 97% of our existence.
“Consider this familiar scene — a scraggly man dressed in furs dragging a woman off to his cave by the hair.”
That “familiar scene” is an old cartoon image. As I understood it, that image was intended as a metaphor for “primitive impulses” rather than a literal depiction of history.
“…the job of the leader is to make sure their team has what they need to do their job effectively.”
Once we remove the technical jargon (actualization?) and the adjectivicized prepositions we are left with the statement above. There is no profound, newly discovered wisdom in the above statement, it is ageless common sense. I find it difficult to imagine a successful leader who intentionally deprives his team of the things they need to do their job; that would be absurd. Of course, not all leaders are successful leaders. Failure to lead effectively is caused by individual flaws rather than the inherent nature of a system.
Holding an office or a position of authority provides an opportunity for a greedy individual to benefit himself at others’ expense. A greedy person may pose as a servant leader in order to be chosen for an office or to gain a position of authority. After gaining authority he will then exploit his position for personal gain. This is a manifestation of personal greed rather than a characteristic of any particular system. Regardless of what system is in place, greedy people will seek to benefit themselves at others’ expense, unless there are no benefits available to gain, as in a prehistoric society where there are barely enough resources to ensure survival.
“Choosing Service Over Self-Interest…”
Everyone must balance the need to serve their own interests against the need to serve the community. The optimum balance is largely determined by environmental circumstances. The balance arrived at varies from individual to individual and spans a variable range. At one extreme of the range are a few individuals who are entirely focused on self-interest at the expense of the community. At the other end a few individuals serve the community without regard to self-interest. The rest span the range from one end to the other. Environmental circumstances largely influence how many individuals operate at any particular point along the range.
“…incorrect assumptions made by earlier scientists who were steeped in patriarchal constructs.”
…and now, there are incorrect assumptions made by later scientists who are steeped in Feminist constructs.
Feminists, in collusion with some of their ideological allies, regularly attempt to obstruct the public expression of ideas that challenge their ideology:
This includes obstruction of scientific research:
Scientific inquiry is driven by research grants, and research grants are often awarded for political reasons, by the desire of politicians to support research that will generate results that support political or social agendas. Higher education is driven by government funding, and government funding by its very nature is political.
In science, the answers one discovers depend on the questions one asks. Since Feminists exercise a disproportionate influence in funding of research, questions whose answers might challenge Feminist ideology are less likely to be funded than questions whose answers would probably support Feminist ideology. Furthermore, researchers who depend on funding sources influenced by Feminists are incentivized to interpret data in a way that is favorable to Feminism rather than in a way that challenges it.
Nevertheless, I have no reason to dispute the finding that humans moved from village to village or that people tended to mate outside of their extended families. Those practices occur in modern populations; they have not changed.
I am skeptical of the idea that one can successfully apply a prehistoric form of social organization to a modern society and that if by chance it were to be successfully applied, its members would necessarily consider it a preferable way to live.
“…It’s fairly different from the one that you believe in…
I am not familiar with the myths that you have debunked. If I should happen to run into one of them I will now, thanks to you, be able to recognize it as a debunked myth and not confuse it with a valid myth.
In your view individual behavior is constructed by a system of social order; in mine the system of social order is constructed by individual behavior.
In your view men pursue sexual access to women as means of exerting power; in mine men pursue positions of power as a means to gain sexual access to women.
Your understanding is that systems construct individuals, mine is that individuals construct systems.
These contrasting views will influence how each of us interprets the same data. I cannot find a way for those contrasting views to be reconciled with each other, can you?
“…they shared everything just to stay alive.”
They were all equal … equally miserable.
As always, people did what they needed to stay alive. We are descended from those who did what they needed to stay alive. Those who did otherwise are now extinct.
A drastic change in the way human populations acquired essential resources would necessitate a drastic change in the way the populations organized themselves.
