Archaeologies of Consciousness — new book by Gyrus

close
more_vert
StoneGloves S
StoneGloves Jan 21, 2008 14:37:04
Replying to CianMcLiam

The animals know that you're doing something with stones. They understand that and certainly seem to appreciate structures. I've gleaned that from watching them. Oh here's the stone man. It'd be difficult to say they appreciated them aesthetically other than for their functions. As roost - look out spot - shelter etc. Human sensibility was very poorly developed back when the stones were put up - you can see that in the enormous amount of energy, time and effort, that went into building them, arranging them and so on. It's curious to see that a shop in Manchester is selling dried Fly agaric, one in Ncle too; it'd be interesting to watch those who were buying it.

J Jane
Jane Jan 21, 2008 14:43:45
Replying to StoneGloves

StoneGloves wrote:
...Human sensibility was very poorly developed back when the stones were put up - you can see that in the enormous amount of energy, time and effort, that went into building them, arranging them and so on.
Gosh! I really must be having a 'blonde day' because I don't understand this either :-(

Who says 'Human sensibility was very poorly developed back when the stones were put up'? I would beg to disagree with this. And in fact, what do you mean by 'Human sensibility'? Surely in saying each half of this above sentence you have directly contradicted yourself?

Or something.

*baffled*
J
x

P Penske666
Penske666 Jan 21, 2008 15:12:42
Replying to StoneGloves

Surely these people need a reindeer to eat and pee it out first - Maybe this is what Santa does the rest of the year?

Has anyone ever tried this? I study fungi for a laugh but would like to know exactly what happen (sensations etc...). Don't want to try it myself as don't want to be the second recorded death due to these lovely creatures (rather photograph them)

(=

(=

C CianMcLiam
CianMcLiam Jan 21, 2008 15:24:26
Replying to StoneGloves

StoneGloves wrote:
Human sensibility was very poorly developed back when the stones were put up - you can see that in the enormous amount of energy, time and effort, that went into building them, arranging them and so on.
I would disagree, if you consider that the massive monuments were being built during the transition from hunter gatherer communitites to settled farming ones you begin to realise this was probably no coincidence. It seems likely to me that building a massive monument was an ingenious way to cement a growing community of non-related individuals, weed out those who would reap the benifits of collective food production without contributing their fair share (by making it less attractive when so much time and energy had to be contributed to something that returned little personal gain), and with the resulting focal point of a religious cult that fostered a merging of individual identities into a contrived 'family' that was reinforced by the fruits of collective effort.

The monuments also provided a very strong signal to other groups that demonstrated their collective solidarity and resolve, discouraging smaller, looser groups from attacking or stealing resources.