From: gts (gts_2000@yahoo.com)
Date: Thu Apr 17 2003 - 18:28:58 MDT
Mez wrote:
> Animals in the wild will hunt their prey to extinction if
> conditions allow. Primitive humans were no different.
I don't doubt that for a minute. In fact I've been arguing that this is in
fact what occurred, and that the extinction of species gave impetus to the
agricultural revolution.
But how is it evidence of a "destructive tendency" in animals or paleo
humans who knew no better? They were merely trying to feed themselves. Only
in the last half-century or so have any humans even bothered to think about
preserving species.
> For corroborating data see Stephen Pinker's _The Blank Slate_
I have Pinker's book right here on my computer desk, and from scanning it I
know the basic theme, though I haven't yet had time to read it thoroughly.
I'm not trying to argue for the Noble Savage. I'm merely pointing out that I
think Diamond is wrong if he thinks over-hunting is evidence of a
destructive tendency in paleo humans. Dropping napalm on the Vietnamese
might constitute such evidence, but naively over-hunting a species in an
effort to feed oneself? Where is the logic in that, mez?
Currently I'm reading an excellent little book called _Dawkins vs Gould:
Survival of the Fittest_. I'm trying to understand the details of their long
and sometimes heated debate about the finer points of evolution theory.
-gts
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Apr 17 2003 - 18:34:24 MDT