Why are humans so stupid?

[teflonfanatic]

This is a question for Falconor, I just want a scientific explanation on why it took over 6,000 years(or 6 billion years if your an evolutionist) to invent some of the stuff we have now.

[falcon9]

This is a question for Falconor, I just want a scientific explanation on why it took over 6,000 years(or 6 billion years if your an evolutionist) to invent some of the stuff we have now.

While I'm neither "Falconeer02" nor "Falconor", there are several theories extant as to why technological development has taken as long as it has, (assuming of course, that there were no technologically-advanced civilizations prior to the current ones which has vanished into the mists of time long passed).

One theory, (based upon recorded historical events of the last few thousand years), posits that religious superstitions and general ignorance held back some technological progress for as long as it could, (e.g., Galleo, Da Vinci and untold others suppressed by the 'church'). Do the Dark Ages ring any bells?

In recent years, technological advancement has increased expotentially and who knows where we be by now were it not for such irrational obstacles.

[teflonfanatic]

This is a question for Falconor, I just want a scientific explanation on why it took over 6,000 years(or 6 billion years if your an evolutionist) to invent some of the stuff we have now.

While I'm neither "Falconeer02" nor "Falconor", there are several theories extant as to why technological development has taken as long as it has, (assuming of course, that there were no technologically-advanced civilizations prior to the current ones which has vanished into the mists of time long passed).

One theory, (based upon recorded historical events of the last few thousand years), posits that religious superstitions and general ignorance held back some technological progress for as long as it could, (e.g., Galleo, Da Vinci and untold others suppressed by the 'church'). Do the Dark Ages ring any bells?

In recent years, technological advancement has increased expotentially and who knows where we be by now were it not for such irrational obstacles.

You blaim the dark ages however the dark ages didn't even last that long considering the mileenia or if your an evolutionist bliions of years before that time.  Was the pagan nations supressed by their beliefs too?

[falcon9]

This is a question for Falconor, I just want a scientific explanation on why it took over 6,000 years(or 6 billion years if your an evolutionist) to invent some of the stuff we have now.

While I'm neither "Falconeer02" nor "Falconor", there are several theories extant as to why technological development has taken as long as it has, (assuming of course, that there were no technologically-advanced civilizations prior to the current ones which has vanished into the mists of time long passed).

One theory, (based upon recorded historical events of the last few thousand years), posits that religious superstitions and general ignorance held back some technological progress for as long as it could, (e.g., Galleo, Da Vinci and untold others suppressed by the 'church'). Do the Dark Ages ring any bells?

In recent years, technological advancement has increased expotentially and who knows where we be by now were it not for such irrational obstacles.

You blaim the dark ages however the dark ages didn't even last that long considering the mileenia or if your an evolutionist bliions of years before that time.  Was the pagan nations supressed by their beliefs too?

There were several "dark ages" however, the suppressive xtian ones lasted about 500 years and severely restricted scientific progress.  There may have been other advanced civilizations prior to ours, (remnants of which preceded Aegyptian, Sumerian, Mesopotamian, etc.), in which the level of technology declined due to war/climatic changes or other undetermined factors.  The pagans, (anyone who wasn't xtian), had their own numerous superstitious beliefs to account for natural phenomenon and these also put the brakes on some technological development.  There were a few distinctions however; chemistry and medicine arose from pagan alchemies and 'hedgewitchcraft' for example.

[Graeth]

This is a question for Falconor, I just want a scientific explanation on why it took over 6,000 years(or 6 billion years if your an evolutionist) to invent some of the stuff we have now.

Because its a fluke that mankind has survived this long.
People say that its amazing we have survived all the wars we've had until now.
The question we should be asking is: are we worthy of surviving.

[Falconer02]

I just want a scientific explanation on why it took over 6,000 years(or 6 billion years if your an evolutionist) to invent some of the stuff we have now.

There's too much to this question to just answer it in a couple of paragraphs. It's also 1:30 AM here so I'll try to answer it the best I can in a small amount of words-

First off, we weren't around 6 billion years ago to invent anything. But we've been  inventing stuff for a lot longer than 6,000 years.

Taking a look at recorded history, once in a while you'll get a person or small group of people to develop something extraordinary. This then serves as/becomes a foundation of everyday life and it is constantly being improved by others. Now consider throughout history the amount of struggles humanity has gone through due to the harsh conditions of nature. Child-death rates were always extremely high, deadly sicknesses loomed everywhere, weather could be unpredictable and ruin crops thus starvation, etc. etc. What people dont understand is the basic elements of nature had us under control for an extremely long time by keeping populations in check. But as history progressed, medicines and technology developed which helped us understand and even supress natures harsh burdens. This meant more people could live healthier, longer, and reproduce more. When you have more people in the world, the chances of having those people who develop those extraordinary things improves exponentially. And thus here we are- society evolving at a highly accelerated rate (when compared to the past). We're constantly evolving infrastructure. My brother put it best when we were talking about flight technology a month ago-

"Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Ideas. Da Vinci! Nothing. Nothing. Ideas. Wright Brothers! Rockets! Sputnik! THE MOON!!!"

BUT PROBLEMS LURK! *GASP*





This is also a major problem because we now see ourselves as conquerors of nature when in reality we're really hurting ourselves by overpopulating the earth. In some ways having people live longer, reproduce more, etc. will ensure other major problems that nature is going to throw at us. Hopefully there will be individuals and groups who will solve the constantly brewing problems we face. One things for certain-- Nature, in a historic sense, is a fierce and fickle *bleep* to sentient life. It's always a clunky ride and we're always trying to put struts on her.

One theory, (based upon recorded historical events of the last few thousand years), posits that religious superstitions and general ignorance held back some technological progress for as long as it could, (e.g., Galleo, Da Vinci and untold others suppressed by the 'church'). Do the Dark Ages ring any bells?

I believe anyone who stands back and accurately looks at how nature works will realize how absurd the idea of a loving deity really is. As for religion getting in the way of progess, I think Thunderf00t on youtube put it best- "If religious dogma and restrictions weren't a problem in the past, Columbus wouldn't have been discovering america. He would have been landing on the moon."

The question we should be asking is: are we worthy of surviving.

As long as education spreads about how reality works, we will always be worthy of surviving.

[falcon9]

I just want a scientific explanation on why it took over 6,000 years(or 6 billion years if your an evolutionist) to invent some of the stuff we have now.

There's too much to this question to just answer it in a couple of paragraphs. It's also 1:30 AM here so I'll try to answer it the best I can in a small amount of words-

First off, we weren't around 6 billion years ago to invent anything. But we've been  inventing stuff for a lot longer than 6,000 years.

Taking a look at recorded history, once in a while you'll get a person or small group of people to develop something extraordinary. This then serves as/becomes a foundation of everyday life and it is constantly being improved by others. Now consider throughout history the amount of struggles humanity has gone through due to the harsh conditions of nature. Child-death rates were always extremely high, deadly sicknesses loomed everywhere, weather could be unpredictable and ruin crops thus starvation, etc. etc. What people dont understand is the basic elements of nature had us under control for an extremely long time by keeping populations in check. But as history progressed, medicines and technology developed which helped us understand and even supress natures harsh burdens. This meant more people could live healthier, longer, and reproduce more. When you have more people in the world, the chances of having those people who develop those extraordinary things improves exponentially. And thus here we are- society evolving at a highly accelerated rate (when compared to the past). We're constantly evolving infrastructure. My brother put it best when we were talking about flight technology a month ago-

"Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Ideas. Da Vinci! Nothing. Nothing. Ideas. Wright Brothers! Rockets! Sputnik! THE MOON!!!"

BUT PROBLEMS LURK! *GASP*





This is also a major problem because we now see ourselves as conquerors of nature when in reality we're really hurting ourselves by overpopulating the earth. In some ways having people live longer, reproduce more, etc. will ensure other major problems that nature is going to throw at us. Hopefully there will be individuals and groups who will solve the constantly brewing problems we face. One things for certain-- Nature, in a historic sense, is a fierce and fickle *bleep* to sentient life. It's always a clunky ride and we're always trying to put struts on her.

One theory, (based upon recorded historical events of the last few thousand years), posits that religious superstitions and general ignorance held back some technological progress for as long as it could, (e.g., Galileo, Da Vinci and untold others suppressed by the 'church'). Do the Dark Ages ring any bells?

I believe anyone who stands back and accurately looks at how nature works will realize how absurd the idea of a loving deity really is. As for religion getting in the way of progess, I think Thunderf00t on youtube put it best- "If religious dogma and restrictions weren't a problem in the past, Columbus wouldn't have been discovering america. He would have been landing on the moon."

The question we should be asking is: are we worthy of surviving.

As long as education spreads about how reality works, we will always be worthy of surviving.

Well-said. I'd probably rephrase the last bit as; as long as education engenders learning how reality actually works, (as opposed to how some would wish it to work), those of us who can learn will be worthy of more than just surviving.  But that's almost peripheral to a theory that, if we advanced too quickly technologically, we could shoot ourselves in the collective foot, (still could - we've been at dangerous DEFCON levels in the past 50 years and just skated-by).

[queenofnines]

I just want a scientific explanation on why it took over 6,000 years(or 6 billion years if your an evolutionist) to invent some of the stuff we have now.

I guess you don't know that modern humans have only been around 100,000 years?  And that evolution (including that of the mind) is generally a sloooow process?

I'm with ya, though, on thinking humanity is still quite stupid when we can fly to the moon, connect to anyone in the world on this thing called 'the Internet', yet still pretend like the invisible, imaginary gods of our primitive ancestors has anything at all to do with our success.

[Abrupt]

I just want a scientific explanation on why it took over 6,000 years(or 6 billion years if your an evolutionist) to invent some of the stuff we have now.

I guess you don't know that modern humans have only been around 100,000 years?  And that evolution (including that of the mind) is generally a sloooow process?

I'm with ya, though, on thinking humanity is still quite stupid when we can fly to the moon, connect to anyone in the world on this thing called 'the Internet', yet still pretend like the invisible, imaginary gods of our primitive ancestors has anything at all to do with our success.

Is it possible, that I can detect something with my senses that you cannot with yours (or vice versa)?

[falcon9]

Is it possible, that I can detect something with my senses that you cannot with yours (or vice versa)?

Are you implicitly claiming some extraordinary perception or, that there is sensory evidence for the claimed perception?

[Abrupt]

Is it possible, that I can detect something with my senses that you cannot with yours (or vice versa)?

Are you implicitly claiming some extraordinary perception or, that there is sensory evidence for the claimed perception?

I don't think I would classify it as the former and the later doesn't quite fit either.  It is more akin to the perception of what my senses are telling my brain is being interpreted in a particular way (not unique though perhaps).  I am color blind and I know that some people can see some things in a way that I cannot.  I also am a fisherman and I know how to interpret the tugs and pulls on a line and can determine if it is a nibble, a strike, a bump, a snag, a crossed line, a spoonbill in the line, a channel cat, a drum, a sauger, or a blue cat (among other things).  In the case of the line detection, these things are learned/revealed through experience and observation and while the sense is innate, the interpretation is not.  I have also hidden treats from my dog and teased him into finding them (which he had no luck with until he used his correct sense, which was his nose of course).  Everything we see or hear or taste or touch or smell is interpreted and it is well know that not everyone interprets things the same (some people like the smell of skunk), even though there is often a consensus among peoples.  Some people are more sensitive to certain things than others and some are less, and there are some like my Cherokee great grandmother who I swear could sense things that few others could.

I don't know if I can give a better answer but I can say that in my time I have seen some strange *bleep* that leaves me somehow thinking I don't quite know it all and that I cannot quite assume that everything I perceive is as it is or that I even perceive everything there is to be perceived.

[falcon9]

It is more akin to the perception of what my senses are telling my brain is being interpreted in a particular way (not unique though perhaps).  I am color blind and I know that some people can see some things in a way that I cannot.

Yes however, there is a difference between color blindness and seeing things that aren't there without color blindness.  That is, if others who do not have color blindness can see color, it is not equivalent to seeing that which cannot be seen by others.

I also am a fisherman and I know how to interpret the tugs and pulls on a line and can determine if it is a nibble, a strike, a bump, a snag, a crossed line, a spoonbill in the line, a channel cat, a drum, a sauger, or a blue cat (among other things).  In the case of the line detection, these things are learned/revealed through experience and observation and while the sense is innate, the interpretation is not.

Those "interpretations" can be a source of dissent.  For instance, misattributing an effect to a cause can lead to the fish getting away.

I have also hidden treats from my dog and teased him into finding them (which he had no luck with until he used his correct sense, which was his nose of course).  Everything we see or hear or taste or touch or smell is interpreted and it is well know that not everyone interprets things the same (some people like the smell of skunk), even though there is often a consensus among peoples.

We agree on the point of interpretations being highly subjective however, I'm guessing that we don't agree about attributions.

Some people are more sensitive to certain things than others and some are less, and there are some like my Cherokee great grandmother who I swear could sense things that few others could.

As mentioned previously, there is a distinct difference between sensing things that are there and attributing a sensation to something which isn't actually there.  Telling the difference is not only a matter of interpretation but, of verifiable evidence.  A 'gut feel' or 'intuitive' sensation may be the result of cumulative subconscious cues which some people utilize and others do not.  Evenso, such 'cues' do not necessarily lead to accurate conclusions.

I don't know if I can give a better answer but I can say that in my time I have seen some strange *bleep* that leaves me somehow thinking I don't quite know it all and that I cannot quite assume that everything I perceive is as it is or that I even perceive everything there is to be perceived.

I'll have to concur with that since the senses can be mislead, (something stage magicians rely upon).  Addditionally, it was once believed that the earth was flat because gross physical senses seemed to support that idea.  It turns out that reasoning could 'see' something more accurately than those other senses.

[tzs]

This is a question for Falconor, I just want a scientific explanation on why it took over 6,000 years(or 6 billion years if your an evolutionist) to invent some of the stuff we have now.

Are you Kidding me! Did you think the computer you are typing on right now just came out of nowhere? Think of it as a child, Teflonfantatic. When a child is born, they don't start singing opera, or figuring out the scientific method immediately,or invent the cure for cancer straight out of the womb-they learn and evolve from those before and after their time that have the experience! It takes time to make "stuff." All of the collective factors brought together over time help humans evolve to invent "stuff", and it inspires the next generation to do more than the previous one. Some "stuff" just takes more effort and experimenting to create and refine the next round of  "stuff" being invented. There are too many factors involved in the inventive process, which include math, theory, science, evolution itself, and time, all of which is tangible in our world. To sum it up for you, time is the reason. Time is constant. Time doesn't make haste, nor does it wait for no man-even you!