>Mfw picrel was the human experience for literal hundreds of thousands if not over a million years... Why did we spend such an ungodly ammount of time as hunter gatherers?
>>18045059cause when you are struggling to survive you dont exactly have time to spend developing tech or studying things. Every day was a battle. As more mega fauna died out, and things got overall safer, humanity could focus on those endeavours more and more. Agricultural crops took thousands of years to get right. There was no way to speed that up.
>>18045059its a case of you you really needed the perfect storm for cvilization, our ancestors literally had to start from scratch, and when you are a hunter gather you have little time to experiment, made harder by the fact if you die so does any knowledge you have so any big death events pretty much set back the clock
>>18045061To add a little more, writing is such an important technology, Human memory gets confused over time, so being able to write things down gave things permanence. Even if the most knowledgeable person died, hey you got that clay tablet explaining things. Not to mention the ability to trade this knowledge allowing it to spread more and more.
>>18045059I have read somewhere that societies were rigid and tribal elders opposed any innovation.Every innovation required a revolution, but it also meant revolutions within the tribe.So, most of human history has involved groups where innovation was suppressed. Periods of innovation were short-lived.
Population density and society size. After you look at societies where those are small you realize that civilization was not something everyone was progressing toward, but rather something that suited a certain demographic setup. If your society has a lot of members and low mobility, civilization is more prone to develop. The question thus is not why civilizaton took so long but why did human population not reach the critical mass needed for civilization. I suspect the culprit is the Last Glacial Maximum driving people to refugia which raised the population density in certain areas. The other is the extinction of big game, which these societies relied upon, which forced societies to find alternative sources of sustenance. But this is more just my thoughts.
>>18045059849 / 5 000Neolithic Revolution is a very unfortunate term – it assumes something happened suddenly and quickly, BUT it was a long-term process that must have taken place in a region where stable and relatively mild climatic conditions persisted for a long time, without extremes in either direction.Agriculture is highly sensitive to climate change, especially such primitive agriculture without irrigation, appropriate equipment, or fertilization. Hence, there could have been many more attempts at agriculture, but unfortunately, they did not survive the subsequent climate deterioration. Agriculture requires peace and quiet. It wasn't like someone found a plant and started. People took a long time to become accustomed to this kind of thing. They gathered wild grasses, and around the Climatic Optimum, when weather conditions were quite good and meat was much harder to come by, they randomly began experimenting with agriculture.
>>18045059no one wants to farm wheat and rice willingly
Might as well ask why poor people who live in squalor never manage to advance out of that lifestyle into something better. Because they're preoccupied with surviving, obviously. It takes very uncommon individuals to be able to set aside immediate concerns like "will I be able to eat today?" to think about stuff that doesn't pertain to immediate needs.
>>18045059> Humans live like ape barbarians for one gorillion years> Blue eyes emerge around 14-7000 BC> Civilizations appear everywhereHMMMMM
>>18045190Here's Billy coming to shit up the thread.
Most people existed in small tribes and hard lives chasing their food.They didn't even have agriculture where they could stay somewhere growing their food.Don't forget they didn't have writing. So you have A:Not mamy people. B:they keep moving around not leaving much in the areas they occupy. C: they can't record their knowledge. That environment clearly isn't good for growing a civilization.
Because civilization is a glorified human's pen. It took serious effort to herd us into it.
>>18045192He's right. (even though he's wrong) White people are a technological innovation. Civilization created whites, not the other way around.
>>18045059There are many contributing factors but the most important one is climate.During the Pleistocene ice ages, climates swung wildly — long glacial periods, short warm interglacials. That unpredictability favored mobility and small, dispersed populations rather than fixed settlements.Around 11,700 years ago, Earth entered the Holocene epoch.Climate stabilized: warmer, wetter, fewer drastic swings.This meant predictable growing seasons and ecosystems rich in wild cereals, legumes, and game.Farming required backbreaking work and was often less nutritious than diverse foraging. People didn’t switch until population pressure and stable climates made it advantageous.
>>18045059Because none of that happened, the earth is 6230 years old give or take. Have fun burning.
>>18045192Simon shitskin
>>18045075To be fair, any innovation poses a massive risk. Sure, a new plough design or whatever might yield more food, but it also might not, and when you're living harvest to harvest, you can't afford to make slightly less food because it will mean half of your tribe/village starves to death.
>>18045059Because agriculture is fucking hard when you have absolutely no idea what the fuck it is.
Low-density hunter-gatherer bands couldn’t support large-scale cities.
The spread of agriculture coincides pretty well with the ending of the last ice age. The climate simply improved to the point where sustained agriculture and permanent settlements became viable.
>>18045059>Survival-of-the-fittest AKA Tautology (Yes its a word), is the reason.Every Gen had it. Its not like you can 'pick and choose' your own adventure when danger lurks behind you or in-front of you.>>18045061Yep this sums it up pretty much too. >>18045065Yeah. In Nordic history (cuz from Scandinavia) we'd do this a lot. Which was just (one) of the many methods why we ruled supreme over so long - I'm simplifying (obviously.. ) but we also had many more methods that kept us well ahead compared to others during that - Viking era.
>>18045075>innovation was suppressedNonsense, most people are simply not smart enough to come up with a new thing or idea.How many of you have done that?Yeah, I thought so...
>>18045059Just imagine how difficult early agriculture was. It is insane to even think that humans back then even bothered to try it.
>>18047275They were forced. Then enslaved and taxed.
