Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Sledgehead

Eden: what did they expect?

Recommended Posts

Watched Eden. Tis true, some makes rather uncomfortable watching; for instance, a group of males pressing a singular female to say which three males she wouldn't mind being shared amongst.

But more generally, I'm wondering who in the production team imagined that sending a group back to the stone age (essentially) would lead to anything but a stone age society.

If women feel they are obstructed in modern society, whatever made anyone think 'Eden', where worth is inevitably measured in raw physicality, would ever result in greater levels of equality?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sledgehead said:

If women feel they are obstructed in modern society, whatever made anyone think feel 'Eden', where worth is inevitably measured in raw physicality, would ever result in greater levels of equality?

With a minor edit, that's how :lol:

Thinking is over-rated, it's The Current Year.  Feelz is where it's at

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, chronyx said:

With a minor edit, that's how :lol:

Thinking is over-rated, it's The Current Year.  Feelz is where it's at

Now you've said that I've gotten my own feelz.

And what I'm feeling is 'pretty stupid' for having not worked that out myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Sledgehead said:

You're just trying not to hurt my thinkings.

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't followed it, just caught bits of it this week.

Were they self sufficient or not? Just asking because I am sure I saw someone puffing away on a ciggie. They also seemed well fed, not over skinny. 

Last night caught last ten minutes - something about a mobile phone being used?

Followed by more burning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, frankief said:

Haven't followed it, just caught bits of it this week.

Were they self sufficient or not? Just asking because I am sure I saw someone puffing away on a ciggie. They also seemed well fed, not over skinny. 

Last night caught last ten minutes - something about a mobile phone being used?

Followed by more burning.

It seems they had access to 'contraband' during a sizable part of the experience. Yet another example of a kind of 'gaming' that went on. Much involved group politics and power struggles with the apparent intention of 'winning' or coming out 'on top', despite the fact that it was never supposed to be a survival show.

The show was billed as an opportunity to build a new society. What emerged were two factions that largely hated each other's guts. Doubtless had the factions been larger, these too would have split, again with interfaction animosity. And had the stakes been higher, violence would have spilled over into outright interfactional warfare.

So much for Eden. More like microcosm-Earth.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to add that one of the more duplicitous and divisive characters (imo), the hunter guy, expressed horror at our Brexit vote (he was in Eden during the vote and supposedly unaware). 

Yeah, cos like he and 'the valley boys' really proved (NOT) how we can all come together and live in harmony. :rolleyes:

If he's anything to go by we shouldn't just stop at Brexit, but rather keep going 'til the UK is 10 million separate countries, each with a population of around 5 people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

16 hours ago, Sledgehead said:

Just to add that one of the more duplicitous and divisive characters (imo), the hunter guy, expressed horror at our Brexit vote (he was in Eden during the vote and supposedly unaware). 

Yeah, cos like he and 'the valley boys' really proved (NOT) how we can all come together and live in harmony. :rolleyes:

If he's anything to go by we shouldn't just stop at Brexit, but rather keep going 'til the UK is 10 million separate countries, each with a population of around 5 people.

 

Not a bad idea. Localisation versus globalisation. 

I'm up for it. As soon as I can find four people who can put up with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, prodigal sheeple said:

 

I'm up for it. As soon as I can find four people who can put up with me.

Communities aren't formed by tolerance, but rather by shared hatred of others. That seems to be the lesson. Whether it's Eden or WWII.

Depressing.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Sledgehead said:

Communities aren't formed by tolerance, but rather by shared hatred of others. That seems to be the lesson. Whether it's Eden or WWII.

Depressing.

 

 

The ancient literature suggests that life in the original Eden was quite pleasant. Maybe civilisation is to blame for our focked up emotions. Recent archeological discoveries and evolutionary physcologists support the hypothesis that our stone age ancestors had communities based on mutual dependance rather than war and hiearchies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, prodigal sheeple said:

The ancient literature suggests that life in the original Eden was quite pleasant. Maybe civilisation is to blame for our focked up emotions. Recent archeological discoveries and evolutionary physcologists support the hypothesis that our stone age ancestors had communities based on mutual dependance rather than war and hiearchies.

That sounds unimaginable nowadays.

I guess cos we have no concept of a surfeit of space.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, prodigal sheeple said:

The ancient literature suggests that life in the original Eden was quite pleasant. Maybe civilisation is to blame for our focked up emotions. Recent archeological discoveries and evolutionary physcologists support the hypothesis that our stone age ancestors had communities based on mutual dependance rather than war and hiearchies.

Linky from good peer reviewed journals or I call bullsh1t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Si1 said:

Linky from good peer reviewed journals or I call bullsh1t.

Apologies for academic laziness, I am more of a bullshitter than a scholar. Here is some thin evidence pasted from wikipedia. 

According to cultural anthropologist and ethnographer Raymond C. Kelly, the earliest hunter-gatherer societies of Homo erectus population density was probably low enough to avoid armed conflict. The development of the throwing-spear, together with ambush hunting techniques, made potential violence between hunting parties very costly, dictating cooperation and maintenance of low population densities to prevent competition for resources. This behavior may have accelerated the migration out of Africa of H. erectus some 1.8 million years ago as a natural consequence of conflict avoidance.

Some scholars believe that this period of "Paleolithic warlessness" persisted until well after the appearance of Homo sapiens some 200,000 years ago, ending only at the occurrence of economic and social shifts associated with sedentism, when new conditions incentivized organized raiding of settlements.[5][6]

Of the many cave paintings of the Upper Paleolithic, none depict people attacking other people explicitly,[7][8] but there are depictions of human beings pierced with arrows both of the Aurignacian-Périgordian (roughly 30,000 years old) and the early Magdalenian (c. 17,000 years old), possibly representing "spontaneous confrontations over game resources" in which hostile trespassers were killed, but other interpretations, including capital punishment, human sacrifice, assassination or systemic warfare cannot be ruled out.[9]

Skeletal and artifactual evidence of intergroup violence between Paleolithic nomadic foragers is absent as well.[8][10]

www.usbig.net/papers/206-Widerquist-Stone%20Age--Oct-09.pdf
  1.  
  2.  
sites.lsa.umich.edu/brianstewart/wp.../sites/.../Schultziner_etal_2010_Biol_Philos.pdf
  1.  
  2.  
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect Si1 to be pretty sniffy about all that, BUT, there is one fact he can't avoid.

So:

2 hours ago, prodigal sheeple said:

According to cultural anthropologist and ethnographer Raymond C. Kelly, the earliest hunter-gatherer societies of Homo erectus population density was probably low enough to avoid armed conflict.

 

 

and according to me, a lowly chemist by education:

On 8/14/2017 at 2:28 PM, Sledgehead said:

That sounds unimaginable nowadays.

I guess cos we have no concept of a surfeit of space.

which brings us to the undeniable conclusion that ....

....

....

some subjects are as usefully winged as studied.

And if Mr Raymond C Kelly has any issue with that, let's first see him derive the Schrodinger equation. :D

PS : if any of his students are reading this, I'd be quite willing to spout a load of extemporaneous BS once a week for an hour in exchange for £8k pa - a £1k pa saving on your current fees: BARGAIN!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, prodigal sheeple said:

Apologies for academic laziness, I am more of a bullshitter than a scholar. Here is some thin evidence pasted from wikipedia. 

According to cultural anthropologist and ethnographer Raymond C. Kelly, the earliest hunter-gatherer societies of Homo erectus population density was probably low enough to avoid armed conflict. The development of the throwing-spear, together with ambush hunting techniques, made potential violence between hunting parties very costly, dictating cooperation and maintenance of low population densities to prevent competition for resources. This behavior may have accelerated the migration out of Africa of H. erectus some 1.8 million years ago as a natural consequence of conflict avoidance.

Some scholars believe that this period of "Paleolithic warlessness" persisted until well after the appearance of Homo sapiens some 200,000 years ago, ending only at the occurrence of economic and social shifts associated with sedentism, when new conditions incentivized organized raiding of settlements.[5][6]

Of the many cave paintings of the Upper Paleolithic, none depict people attacking other people explicitly,[7][8] but there are depictions of human beings pierced with arrows both of the Aurignacian-Périgordian (roughly 30,000 years old) and the early Magdalenian (c. 17,000 years old), possibly representing "spontaneous confrontations over game resources" in which hostile trespassers were killed, but other interpretations, including capital punishment, human sacrifice, assassination or systemic warfare cannot be ruled out.[9]

Skeletal and artifactual evidence of intergroup violence between Paleolithic nomadic foragers is absent as well.[8][10]

www.usbig.net/papers/206-Widerquist-Stone%20Age--Oct-09.pdf
  1.  
  2.  
sites.lsa.umich.edu/brianstewart/wp.../sites/.../Schultziner_etal_2010_Biol_Philos.pdf
  1.  
  2.  
 

Ok, fair play. Society wasn't based on mutual dependence, rather it was based on population sparseness. Or at least it's not an incontrovertible conclusion given the evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   26 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.