Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Man is man and the man of the past is no less intelligent than you or I
Cro-magnon (anatomically modern) man had no less intelligence but he had far less information at this stage compared to the knowledge we have today in the form of information. In that way, yes, Bronze Age man was ignorant (not unintelligent, not incapable of learning, but literally ignorant) of a huge amount of the information we today take for granted, and teach our children, every single day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by expatCA
and had in many cases knowledge beyond what we grasp today.
Unlikely. What do you base this on? And what "knowledge" do you refer to here?
My youngest son is very, very bright. He had an IQ test (which I was not aware of until after it had been given to him - I didn't realize it was going to be included in a variety of school tests being given at the same time) and the teachers were all astonished. They knew he was bright - he did and does all the "showoff" "look at me, Mom" things like reading up to a middle school level depending upon the book and pulling math facts out of his head - but apparently he's significantly above the average, not just an "early starter" or what-have-you. (How do they come up with these stupid categorizations, anyway?)
So this is a bright boy. Not "unintelligent" in the least. However, if he were raised on an island with a group of illiterate people who thought the sun was a chariot and cancer happened because demons ate one's organs, and that babies came from a man's spirit swallowing a woman's spirit and lodging in her womb, he would live and die being ignorant (of actual facts) no matter how innately intelligent he was (is).
Saying a person or group is ignorant doesn't, by any means, automatically mean saying the person or group is dull, dim or incapable of learning. Bronze Age man simply did not have the knowledge or the tools - it doesn't matter what how many actual ccs he had of grey matter inside his skull (nor what his potential to learn might have been).
Now Mystic said cognitive complexity...I'm not sure that was the correct way to put things, as the complexity was certainly there. But I got the gist of what he was saying (or I think I did)...not that these people were "stupid" but that they didn't have knowledge and information we have today. That information is complex even though physically, the brain itself is no more complex.
Man is man and the man of the past is no less intelligent than you or I and had in many cases knowledge beyond what we grasp today. Thery did far more than we can fully grasp today and without our vast knowledge base. It is man today who thinks he is superior and in fact is less so.
It does reveal why you believe as you do. You elevate today's man's thoughts (and by extrapolation yours) to a superior position. It ain't so. We would be on their level, or below, if it were not for the vast amount of data/knowledge available now, not due to any superiority in reasoning.
I agree.
Look at what took place in Genesis...
Eve took the lead instead of Adam with regards to dealing with the serpent... do many woman lead where men are absent and silent today?
When called God Adam and Eve on their sinned, they did not take responsibility and blamed others... have we really evolved out of that behavior?
Cain killed his brother because he was mad about the offering... sounds like a normal day in the life in 2014.
You are confusing who had lack of knowledge and concepts. It was our primitive ancestors. The real problem is one of cognitive simplicity as compared with our cognitive complexity today. The majority of us do not think very much about how we get the cognitive concepts and constructs we think with . . . but they must be acquired. We just take them for granted and assume any other thinking human being has them as well. But our primitive ancestors had very limited concepts to think with and communicate ideas with. They were far more limited to physical (carnal) reality than we are with our more abstract cognitive concepts and versatile semantic language. The difference between us and them is far more like the difference between an adult today and a two to five year old child. That is the reason for the use of parables and figurative language using concrete physical entities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by expatCA
Arrogant garbage.
Man is man and the man of the past is no less intelligent than you or I and had in many cases knowledge beyond what we grasp today. Thery did far more than we can fully grasp today and without our vast knowledge base. It is man today who thinks he is superior and in fact is less so.
Perhaps I used words and concepts that you are unfamiliar with so you didn't grasp what I was trying to communicate. It is an effect similar to what I was referring to. We think with words, cognitive constructs, and concepts. For example, this is why thinking can be so different in people who have different native languages. In Spanish . . . there is no word for the concept and construct of compromise. But there is a cognate that actually means the complete opposite . . . compromiso. This makes the negotiating about things requiring compromise very difficult for native Spanish speakers . . . who have not learned English. They don't even have an equivalent concept to relate the concept or idea to.
We think with what we know and what we have concepts for. Our ancestors were not less intelligent than we are . . . they just did not have an equivalent diversity of concepts, ideas and knowledge to humans today. They were limited to what they had experience with and concepts for . . . which were primarily simplistic, carnal and concrete with few if any abstractions. A genius would have had the same limitations.
Quote:
It does reveal why you believe as you do. You elevate today's man's thoughts (and by extrapolation yours) to a superior position. It ain't so. We would be on their level, or below, if it were not for the vast amount of data/knowledge available now, not due to any superiority in reasoning.
I never ever suggested we had less intelligence . . . just minds with fewer cognitive constructs, concepts, ideas, etc. with which to think and communicate about anything.
Eve took the lead instead of Adam with regards to dealing with the serpent... do many woman lead where men are absent and silent today?
Yes we do, of course we do. I'm not understanding this point? MANY women have to "lead" their families in the absence of a man (or sometimes even when one is present in the family), lead offices...lead in political positions, yes, believe it or not...what was the point of this question? I don't fully understand it. That's not about being smarter or more stupid, or being more or less knowledgeable. It's about bare bones survival and what people have to do to keep their lives and especially, their children going.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
When called God Adam and Eve on their sinned, they did not take responsibility and blamed others... have we really evolved out of that behavior?
Have we "evolved out of" complete and utter terror of a superior being, to the point that it could destroy is if we're found wanting, therefore, we lie to try to save our lives? Uh, no. Reasonably enough, no, we haven't. Because shockingly enough, when faced with a homicidal bully who has us 100% in his control, yes, we do go into survival mode. This translates to "more intelligent" in the Bronze Age or "less intelligent" or perhaps "no growth of knowledge" modern-day how, again?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
Cain killed his brother because he was mad about the offering... sounds like a normal day in the life in 2014.
This, my friend, is an absolutely moronic statement, especially since in certain key significant world-leading nations...the U.S. among them...murder per capita is far lower than in Bronze Age times. I can get you a reference if you want.
Cro-magnon (anatomically modern) man had no less intelligence but he had far less information at this stage compared to the knowledge we have today in the form of information. In that way, yes, Bronze Age man was ignorant (not unintelligent, not incapable of learning, but literally ignorant) of a huge amount of the information we today take for granted, and teach our children, every single day.
Amen! They didn't know as much as our seven year-old's do today . . . often far less.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerZ
My youngest son is very, very bright. He had an IQ test (which I was not aware of until after it had been given to him - I didn't realize it was going to be included in a variety of school tests being given at the same time) and the teachers were all astonished. They knew he was bright - he did and does all the "showoff" "look at me, Mom" things like reading up to a middle school level depending upon the book and pulling math facts out of his head - but apparently he's significantly above the average, not just an "early starter" or what-have-you. (How do they come up with these stupid categorizations, anyway?)
So this is a bright boy. Not "unintelligent" in the least. However, if he were raised on an island with a group of illiterate people who thought the sun was a chariot and cancer happened because demons ate one's organs, and that babies came from a man's spirit swallowing a woman's spirit and lodging in her womb, he would live and die being ignorant (of actual facts) no matter how innately intelligent he was (is).
Saying a person or group is ignorant doesn't, by any means, automatically mean saying the person or group is dull, dim or incapable of learning. Bronze Age man simply did not have the knowledge or the tools - it doesn't matter what how many actual ccs he had of grey matter inside his skull (nor what his potential to learn might have been).
Now Mystic said cognitive complexity...I'm not sure that was the correct way to put things, as the complexity was certainly there. But I got the gist of what he was saying (or I think I did)...not that these people were "stupid" but that they didn't have knowledge and information we have today. That information is complex even though physically, the brain itself is no more complex.
IMO.
Yes . . . I worded it poorly but you did grasp the point, JerZ. It is not the complexity of the brain. Actually cognitive complexity is a term of art for the amount of knowledge and information available to form thoughts, ideas, concepts and other cognitive constructs. It is correlated with intelligence only because typically more information and more sophisticated concepts are gathered by intelligent people.
Actually cognitive complexity is a term of art for the amount of knowledge and information available to form thoughts, ideas, concepts and other cognitive constructs. It is correlated with intelligence only because typically more information and more sophisticated concepts are gathered by intelligent people.
Cro-magnon (anatomically modern) man had no less intelligence but he had far less information at this stage compared to the knowledge we have today in the form of information. In that way, yes, Bronze Age man was ignorant (not unintelligent, not incapable of learning, but literally ignorant) of a huge amount of the information we today take for granted, and teach our children, every single day.
The socalled Cro-magnon man was not the ancient man we are discussing (Dated from 40,000 to 10,000 BC), so immaterial. Yes ancient men were less informed but not less intelligent.
Quote:
Unlikely. What do you base this on? And what "knowledge" do you refer to here?
OK, these "ignorant" men made glass, developed copper, bronze and ultimately iron refining and manipulating and then they went on to make special steels that only in the last 100 years was man able to duplicate such and they did these in widely disparate places without sharing knowledge.
I have known of this for decades and do suggest you ask HOW such ignorant men could have done what wasn't done till just a few hundred years ago.
Their intellectual abilities were not stunted by mindless videos and TV programs and associated drivel that intelligent and non ignorant man relishes today. Oh and scientific and behavioral studies that change quite frequently.
Selling them short as primitive etc is used to avoid giving credence to anything they had to say about God's existence. That alone shows a lack of intelligence, by modern man.
Eve took the lead instead of Adam with regards to dealing with the serpent... do many woman lead where men are absent and silent today?
When called God Adam and Eve on their sinned, they did not take responsibility and blamed others... have we really evolved out of that behavior?
Cain killed his brother because he was mad about the offering... sounds like a normal day in the life in 2014.
Yes, scientific knowledge comes and goes, but man remains the same and that is what the Bible is addresssing. Not nuclear power, belonging to Mensa, etc.
Perhaps I used words and concepts that you are unfamiliar with so you didn't grasp what I was trying to communicate. It is an effect similar to what I was referring to. We think with words, cognitive constructs, and concepts. For example, this is why thinking can be so different in people who have different native languages. In Spanish . . . there is no word for the concept and construct of compromise. But there is a cognate that actually means the complete opposite . . . compromiso. This makes the negotiating about things requiring compromise very difficult for native Spanish speakers . . . who have not learned English. They don't even have an equivalent concept to relate the concept or idea to.
We think with what we know and what we have concepts for. Our ancestors were not less intelligent than we are . . . they just did not have an equivalent diversity of concepts, ideas and knowledge to humans today. They were limited to what they had experience with and concepts for . . . which were primarily simplistic, carnal and concrete with few if any abstractions. A genius would have had the same limitations.I never ever suggested we had less intelligence . . . just minds with fewer cognitive constructs, concepts, ideas, etc. with which to think and communicate about anything.
Oh, I understood what you were . The problem is that you are equating accumulated knowledge, societal, with the ability to think and reason on thoughts about say ......... God.
However in many ways their ability to communicate easily and speedily was superior.
As an example If someone today says "I love Him/Her" what do they mean?
Both Hebrew and Greek are superior to English in this as to communication. Greek has 4 words that convey exactly what is meant and in English, to avoid confusion, it takes many more words. They also had the ability to reason at the same level we can and did. Were there some stupid beliefs, yes, but there are today as well. Did they also have a wide diversity of concepts, yep as they were ........... intelligent men.
You seem to be equating available knowledge to society as the deciding point on what is valid and what isn't and that ain't so.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
