Re: The death of the RTB model

From: <RFaussette@aol.com>
Date: Sun Feb 12 2006 - 12:23:29 EST

In a message dated 2/11/2006 9:30:29 PM Eastern Standard Time,
glennmorton@entouch.net writes:
>The part I have a problem with is Templeton’s conclusion that they “made
love not war.” I’m sure
>Homo erectus tribes welcomed with open arms hoards of Homo sapiens warriors
eager to spread
>their genes among the lady folk. Methinks Templeton’s science outflanks his
knowledge of human >behavior.
At the risk of being indelicate, I would point out that all peoples seem to
want to spread their genes, be it ladies or men. And that brings me to the
point of, well indelicacy. If there be any truth to the rumors that certain
groups of men liked sheep and certain women engaged in the activities similar what
Catherine the Great supposedly did, then there would be little rational reason
to believe that there would be too many scruples against an archaic/modern
mating of either directionality. Thus, I would say that your knowledge of human
behavior may need some improvement.
I also question templeton's conclusion. He reflects the Boasian/Mead view of
primitive society as tranquil. Here we are not even talking about humans, but
proto humans and humans occupying the same territory.

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2005/08/neolithic-and-evolution-of-fear.html

I don't know how Templeton's conclusion and the reality of the study at the
above link could both be credible.

[snip]
The following article argues that certain unexplained fear symptoms evolved
during the Neolithic. Here is how the authors describe Neolithic warfare:

Paleo-anthropological research has documented a specific pattern of
prehistoric inter-group warfare in the Neolithic. In contrast to warfare in historical
times, Neolithic inter-group warfare almost exclusively involved attacks
against non-combatants in unsuspecting settlements by raiding parties of mateless
young, post-pubertal males in search of material and especially reproductive
resources. Neolithic combat occurred exclusively between young males, with
females and children serving as objects of competition. This has been clearly
documented by research on prehistoric human remains. It has been estimated that the
victors killed 15%–50% of post-pubertal males and most infants and toddlers,
and took females and most weaned pre-pubertal individuals captive (Lambert,
1997, Larsen, 1999, LeBlanc and Register, 2003 and Maschner and Reedy-Maschner,
1998).

The authors argue that the higher prevalence of these unexplained fear
symptoms in women than in men, and in younger persons is due to the special nature
of Neolithic warfare. Before the Neolithic, humans were most in danger from
non-human predators; a fear response played no role against such predators.
However, during the Neolithic, other humans replaced non-humans as the greatest
danger. Pseudo-neurological problems evolved as a way to signal to the attacking
males that one was incapacitated and hence did not pose a danger. This
strategy worked especially for young females who are desirable for their mating
potential; pre-Neolithic non-human predators made no such distinctions, as humans
of both genders and regardless of age were viewed as a food source.

rich faussette
Received on Sun Feb 12 12:24:54 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Feb 12 2006 - 12:24:54 EST