Civilization question?

Here's where you get off topic and off center....Keep it nice, keep it clean, no sniping, no flaming. After that, anything goes.

Moderators: MichelleH, Minimalist, JPeters

Forum Monk
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: USA

Post by Forum Monk »

Ishtar wrote:Monk, shamanism hasn't existed in any meaningful sense for about 8,000 years - so it can hardly be blamed for not inventing the computer or putting a man on the moon or wiping out diseases.
I nearly logged out but this statement came back to haunt me.

If I understand correctly, the practice of Shamanism ended about 6000BC so now I am wondering, if that is true, it died out some 3000 years before written language. Therefore it would be virtually unknown today.

Or, by meaningful sense, do you mean it has continued but in a very very limited capacity?
rich
Posts: 486
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:08 pm
Location: New York state

Post by rich »

Monk

I think Shamanism only died out in the western culture back then - not across the world. And the few remnants of it which the west encountered even up to recent years have been looked down upon as pagan and/or uneducated systems.
i'm not lookin' for who or what made the earth - just who got me dizzy by makin it spin
Forum Monk
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: USA

Post by Forum Monk »

Which western culture was around in 6000BC?
:shock:
Ishtar
Posts: 2631
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:41 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by Ishtar »

Well Monk, I don't want to get sucked into this again ... but nobody knows exactly when it began to turn into religion - my guess is at the beginning of the Neolithic and the advent of agriculture, the reasons for which I posted earlier on today when we were talking about megaliths in Turkey.

The takeover of religion was a gradual process and so it disappeared or went underground at different times in different parts of the world.

It did pretty well become extinct although it continued, and does still continue, to exist today in very small pockets (such as the Australian Aborigines and the San Bushmen and the Sami reindeer herders in Finland). Some of them also went right underground like the Path of Pollen, the Bee Shamans of the British Isles. And of course the Native Americans practised until relatively recently.

So no they didn't invent the computer - but you have to ask yourself, what need would these communities have for one? :lol:

And there are times when I wish myself that they hadn't been invented! :lol:
Last edited by Ishtar on Sun Apr 27, 2008 11:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
rich
Posts: 486
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:08 pm
Location: New York state

Post by rich »

It was starting to evolve maybe. 'Sides - I never said it died out 6000BC! I only meant as far as western culture it was dead - including their interpretations of when it would have died.
i'm not lookin' for who or what made the earth - just who got me dizzy by makin it spin
rich
Posts: 486
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:08 pm
Location: New York state

Post by rich »

Also, Monk, even modern science has taken recipes for modern medicines from "witchcraft" societies that they found worked surprisingly well. Coincidence that backward peoples would have a knowledge of medicines that we in our modern ways don't?
i'm not lookin' for who or what made the earth - just who got me dizzy by makin it spin
War Arrow
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2006 7:05 am
Location: Texas
Contact:

Post by War Arrow »

I'm not buying this whole idea of science being this terrible thing that has turned up to crush earlier more-intuitive systems. Discovering that a certain type of bark cures headaches several thousand years ago is as much science as pointing radio telescopes at Quasars.

Here's something I wrote a while ago. Feedback appreciated.
http://archaeologica.boardbot.com/viewt ... 74&start=0
Image
User avatar
Digit
Posts: 6618
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Wales, UK

Post by Digit »

Science has given us the washine machine and cocker that gives Ish the time to pursue her other interests and the computer to disseminate thm. Worth remembering.
rich
Posts: 486
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 11:08 pm
Location: New York state

Post by rich »

WA - that is dynamite. Very good insight.
Digit - true, but even science is only a product of our own creation, and quite often it does lean on older tech. The machines of today would not be around without mundane elbow grease to make them. Is using a stick as a tool to collect ants science on the part of monkeys? Science itself is a tool our mind uses - just as were shamanism, religions, etc. - Not saying they don't work or they do - they are all tools - used to get a job done.
i'm not lookin' for who or what made the earth - just who got me dizzy by makin it spin
User avatar
Digit
Posts: 6618
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Wales, UK

Post by Digit »

True Rich that science is such a product. Crick was not the only man to admit to such a flash of 'inspiration' by the way, check out Bohr and the atom. But also insanity, or if you prefer, irrational behaviour is also such a product. The fact that science leans on older tech matters not, science is ongoing.
I also have had the same flashes at times, so much so that I learned to say to people who asked how I knew how to do something, that I had seen it done before as I doubted they would have believed the truth.
I have, as I have posted here before, accurately seen the future on occasion, does that mean the future is fixed, are we just re-running an endless tape.
Surely, if the future is fixed, so was the past and if this is all predestined then an overall controller, or God help us, a committee is a necessity.
Ishtar
Posts: 2631
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:41 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by Ishtar »

Digit wrote:Science has given us the washine machine and cocker that gives Ish the time to pursue her other interests
Who is this cocker I have to be so grateful for?

Dig, I pity your poor wife. Does she have to be grateful for her washing machine and cocker too .....or do you take the odd turn in the kitchen? :lol:
Ishtar
Posts: 2631
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:41 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by Ishtar »

War Arrow wrote:I'm not buying this whole idea of science being this terrible thing that has turned up to crush earlier more-intuitive systems.
It was religion that crushed earlier more intuitive systems. Not science. There was no intuitive system for science to crush by the time it came along....
User avatar
Digit
Posts: 6618
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:22 pm
Location: Wales, UK

Post by Digit »

OK, Cooker. That I have to say is a female response. Don't take the details literally. The point was following what WA had said, that Shamanism has produced nothing, science is what has given you the time to think, to question, to practice.
When I was a child women, even in this 'advanced' country, had a bloody hard life! For that increased freedom that science has given us, yes, we should be grateful.
I don't know how old you are Ish and as a gentleman I'm not going to ask, but in my childhood, producing the evening meal for the 'bread winner' was an all day job that started in the morning with the shopping and was ongoing throughout the day, along with cleaning, looking after any children and doing the washing.
The 'good old days' my foot!
Ishtar
Posts: 2631
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:41 am
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by Ishtar »

Digit wrote:OK, Cooker. That I have to say is a female response. Don't take the details literally. The point was following what WA had said, that Shamanism has produced nothing, science is what has given you the time to think, to question, to practice.
When I was a child women, even in this 'advanced' country, had a bloody hard life! For that increased freedom that science has given us, yes, we should be grateful.
I don't know how old you are Ish and as a gentleman I'm not going to ask, but in my childhood, producing the evening meal for the 'bread winner' was an all day job that started in the morning with the shopping and was ongoing throughout the day, along with cleaning, looking after any children and doing the washing.
The 'good old days' my foot!
Dig, it always amazes me how two people can view the exact same thing but see it entirely differently.

Anyway, I'm going to re-run something from one of my posts earlier today:
It's difficult for us to imagine the difference of effort expended to survive in a hunter gatherer society versus an agricultural one - both look like hard work to us!

But the writer Marshall Sahlins coined the phrase 'the original affluent society' about hunter gatherers. And Lorna Marshall, an anthropologist writing about the San Bushmen in the 1950s, described them as enjoying 'a kind of material plenty'....
We have to work very hard, Dig, to maintain our lifestyle today...which is why we need all these labour saving gadgets and yes, modern day life would be tough without them. Most people now, no matter what their profession, spend all day sitting in front of one of these marvellous computers that I have to be so grateful for, including me. Occasionally, I look out of the window at the sky, and I do get out a lunchtime to buy an overpriced sandwich that was made the night before. But otherwise, that's my life, five days a week and I'm not much different to most people.

Despite the fact we've never had it so good, our hospitals and doctors' waiting rooms are full to overflowing with obese people who are dying of malnutrition and diabetes, or their addictions to alcohol, cigarettes and drugs.

We're all just slaves to the system really...it's just that, thanks to science, some of us can afford velvet lined shackles and useless little toys, like the latest mobile phone that's also a video camera that's also a game boy that's also an ipod that's also a computer, to distract ourselves from this fact. The day that we became slaves was the day we gave up the hunter gatherer lifestyle, and traded roaming with our herds in the wild and the beautiful for some sort of security that has come at a huge price to us - and not least, to the planet.
Forum Monk
Posts: 1999
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: USA

Post by Forum Monk »

War Arrow wrote:Here's something I wrote a while ago. Feedback appreciated.
W/A I think a critical comparison of science and religion is a bit like the proverbial apples and oranges. They both are applied to totaly separate ends, and there is some relation between the two, but it is like saying apples and oranges are related because they are both fruit.

Science attempts to understand a tangible, material universe that can be observed and measured. Religion attempts to understand an intangible universe. Apples - oranges. Religion asserts that the unseen universe interacts and/or influences the seen universe and so certain aspects of one are seen within the context of the other. Both are fruit.

Respectfully, it appears the dissertation expresses an obvious Judeo-Christian bias and more specifically a Catholic (or perhaps Anglican) bias in its efforts to generalize the tenets of religious thought and world-view. For example the rules laden systems of government which dictates eventual rewards and punishments in the after-life are not present in all religion and not present in many Christian denominations.

The real question, why are science and religion so incompatible in those areas where one cross-over into the context of the other? Fundamentalists will say, because science is built upon faulty principles and error begats error. Scientists will say religion is based upon ignorance of reality.

I will say one thing and agree with Rich and Ishtar. I think we are seeing the tip of the iceberg so to speak. But the 3/4s which is underwater has not been seen; neither by shamans nor priests. (science will be the last to glimpse it, imo)
Last edited by Forum Monk on Sun Apr 27, 2008 2:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply