Robber Baron? Or capitalism in action?

[Mountain Man]

I tried.

You did, and I appreciate the effort, but the sources you presented do not support the assertions you have made throughout this thread. I suppose the polite thing to say at this point is, "Better luck next time."

[Sparko]

[sarcasm intended] And you of course have at your fingertips evidence of people "throughout history"?

Ah, you have no actual objection so you are doing your idiotic requesting sources again? Have you not read a history book?

[Sparko]

There have been several studies that have suggested that the further we go back through time the more likely that someone died via violence. The odds of someone dying as a result of violence has been steadily decreasing through time.

Just compare modern western civilization to the middle east or the third world countries of Central America, or Africa.

[rogue06]

Just compare modern western civilization to the middle east or the third world countries of Central America, or Africa.

The usual counter is that modern technologically advanced civilizations have slaughtered millions which didn't happen previously. Those folks are obviously ignorant of the devastation the Mongol Empire wrought on the world. I've seen estimates at from mid 30s to 60 million. And that in a world with a much smaller total population than in modern times.

And that smaller total population is the key.

While a mass slaughter in actual numbers back in pre-modern times the evidence suggests that a higher percentage of those living back then would die as a result of murder, war or similar violence was considerably higher.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Ah, you have no actual objection so you are doing your idiotic requesting sources again? Have you not read a history book?

I am waiting for you to provide evidence in support of your contention that "The history of the human race proves you wrong. The less civilization (i.e. rules) the more violent people have been all throughout history."

The oldest Homo sapiens fossils so far discovered appear to date back some 300,000 years .Recorded human history began approximately 7,000 years ago with the rise of writing in Sumer and Egypt. The earliest evidence of organised warfare dates back to Sumer.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

You did, and I appreciate the effort, but the sources you presented do not support the assertions you have made throughout this thread. I suppose the polite thing to say at this point is, "Better luck next time."

The fact remains that your assumption alleging humans are innately greedy and exploitative cannot be proven

[rogue06]

I am waiting for you to provide evidence in support of your contention that "The history of the human race proves you wrong. The less civilization (i.e. rules) the more violent people have been all throughout history."

The oldest Homo sapiens fossils so far discovered appear to date back some 300,000 years .Recorded human history began approximately 7,000 years ago with the rise of writing in Sumer and Egypt. The earliest evidence of organised warfare dates back to Sumer.

Prior to the advent of cities true organized warfare was unlikely but that didn't mean they lived a peaceful idyllic life then. We have evidence of warfare and slaughters going back to at least 10,000 years ago and even earlier. At a 13-14,000 year old site in northern Sudan there is a mass burial where over half those interred are peppered with arrow wounds.

Moreover, while not explicitly illustrating warfare some cave paintings dating as far back as 30,000 years old depicted people with arrows sticking in their bodies while some of those on the Iberian Peninsula dating from the Late Mesolithic to Early Neolithic clearly show groups of archers engaging each other in combat.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Prior to the advent of cities true organized warfare was unlikely but that didn't mean they lived a peaceful idyllic life then. We have evidence of warfare and slaughters going back to at least 10,000 years ago and even earlier. At a 13-14,000 year old site in northern Sudan there is a mass burial where over half those interred are peppered with arrow wounds.

Moreover, while not explicitly illustrating warfare some cave paintings dating as far back as 30,000 years old depicted people with arrows sticking in their bodies while some of those on the Iberian Peninsula dating from the Late Mesolithic to Early Neolithic clearly show groups of archers engaging each other in combat.

My emphasis. Dogmatic assumptions concerning the meaning of such ancient images are unwise.

While no one would dispute that early humans did engage in violence, the question is, how much and how often? That remains unknown.

I am therefore still waiting for Sparko to support his contention that "The history of the human race proves you wrong. The less civilization (i.e. rules) the more violent people have been all throughout history."

The article you have cited, with those two isolated examples, has done little to support his contention.

[tabibito]

My emphasis. Dogmatic assumptions concerning the meaning of such ancient images are unwise.

While no one would dispute that early humans did engage in violence, the question is, how much and how often? That remains unknown.

I am therefore still waiting for Sparko to support his contention that "The history of the human race proves you wrong. The less civilization (i.e. rules) the more violent people have been all throughout history."

The article you have cited, with those two isolated examples, has done little to support his contention.

Making a virtue of a necessity perhaps? Give those same ancient peoples the weaponry that came to exist in later times, and what would they have done with it?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Making a virtue of a necessity perhaps? Give those same ancient peoples the weaponry that came to exist in later times, and what would they have done with it?

We simply do not know the degree of violence that might have been expressed among, or between, early human groups. We cannot make assumptions extrapolated from the behaviour of extant hunter-gatherers that early humans necessarily behaved likewise, It remains possible that there may have been behavioural similarities but that cannot be established with any degree of certainty.

[Mountain Man]

The fact remains that your assumption alleging humans are innately greedy and exploitative cannot be proven

And yet greed and exploitation are such commonplace features in human society that I can't think of a better explanation. Perhaps you have one?

[rogue06]

My emphasis. Dogmatic assumptions concerning the meaning of such ancient images are unwise.

While no one would dispute that early humans did engage in violence, the question is, how much and how often? That remains unknown.

I am therefore still waiting for Sparko to support his contention that "The history of the human race proves you wrong. The less civilization (i.e. rules) the more violent people have been all throughout history."

The article you have cited, with those two isolated examples, has done little to support his contention.

Some of the cave paintings show people lined up facing each other shooting arrows while others show smaller group surrounded by a larger group as they shoot arrows at one another. Not much needs to be assumed.

Moreover, excavations of remains from the Paleolithic show, in cases where there are enough remains to be able to make a determination, that there are more instances of people having died by acts of human initiated violence percentwise than in later times. And as time went on fewer and fewer people (percentwise) died as a result of warfare and related violence.

There was a pretty good article in either Skeptic or Skeptical Inquirer several years ago that covered this. I'll see if I can dig it up.

[rogue06]

Making a virtue of a necessity perhaps? Give those same ancient peoples the weaponry that came to exist in later times, and what would they have done with it?

There is a theory that during the earliest advent of Homo sapiens that we avoided conflict because numbers were so low that risking losing even one person could have devastating consequences. But I've never seen anything more than speculation backing it.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

And yet greed and exploitation are such commonplace features in human society that I can't think of a better explanation. Perhaps you have one?

That it may be more commonplace in some societies today does not suppose that such behaviour is innate and has always existed in every human society [as Sparko contends] "all throughout history".

[Sparko]

The fact remains that your assumption alleging humans are innately greedy and exploitative cannot be proven

Then why do we need laws against stealing and killing?