updated 3h ago
The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity
- For Diamond and Fukuyama, as for Rousseau some centuries earlier, what put an end to that equality – everywhere and forever – was the invention of agriculture, and the higher population levels it sustained. Agriculture brought about a transition from ‘bands’ to ‘tribes’. Accumulation of food surplus fed population growth, leading some ‘tribes’ to d... See more
from The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity by David Graeber
Minsuk Kang 강민석 added 10mo ago
- When we simply guess as to what humans in other times and places might be up to, we almost invariably make guesses that are far less interesting, far less quirky – in a word, far less human than what was likely going on.
from The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity by David Graeber
Minsuk Kang 강민석 added 10mo ago
We are projects of collective self-creation. What if we approached human history that way? What if we treat people, from the beginning, as imaginative, intelligent, playful creatures who deserve to be understood as such? What if, instead of telling a story about how our species fell from some idyllic state of equality, we ask how we came to be trap
... See morefrom The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity by David Graeber
Timour Kosters added 10mo ago
The term ‘inequality’ is a way of framing social problems appropriate to an age of technocratic reformers, who assume from the outset that no real vision of social transformation is even on the table.
from The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity by David Graeber
Timour Kosters added 10mo ago
That indigenous Americans lived in generally free societies, and that Europeans did not, was never really a matter of debate in these exchanges: both sides agreed this was the case. What they differed on was whether or not individual liberty was desirable.
from The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity by David Graeber
Timour Kosters added 10mo ago
our standard historical meta-narrative about the ambivalent progress of human civilization, where freedoms are lost as societies grow bigger and more complex – was invented largely for the purpose of neutralizing the threat of indigenous critique.
from The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity by David Graeber
Timour Kosters added 10mo ago
An evolutionary anthropologist and a specialist in primate studies, he argues that while humans do have an instinctual tendency to engage in dominance-submissive behaviour, no doubt inherited from our simian ancestors, what makes societies distinctively human is our ability to make the conscious decision not to act that way. Carefully working throu
... See morefrom The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity by David Graeber
Timour Kosters added 10mo ago
When we are capable of self-awareness, it’s usually for very brief periods of time: the ‘window of consciousness’, during which we can hold a thought or work out a problem, tends to be open on average for roughly seven seconds. What neuroscientists (and it must be said, most contemporary philosophers) almost never notice, however, is that the great
... See morefrom The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity by David Graeber
Timour Kosters added 10mo ago
what really struck him about the ‘primitive’ societies he was most familiar with was their tolerance of eccentricity. This, he concluded, was simply the logical extension of that same rejection of coercion that so impressed the Jesuits in Quebec. If, he noted, a Winnebago decided that gods or spirits did not really exist and refused to perform ritu
... See morefrom The Dawn of Everything: A New History of Humanity by David Graeber
Timour Kosters added 10mo ago