The “I “ I was referring to is quite distinct from that what is found in religion where these “I”s are individuals who are subsumed into something greater than the sum of their parts .
Any “I” who behaves like the extreme “I” I refer to e.g. the those attempting to convince others that they have an insight that the rest are incapable of e.g. a Messiah type mentality , would be considered a heretic in most religious communities , there are some where it may be welcomed as long as the “insights “ don't disturb party thinking in which case they might be considered prophets .
The mentality of the “I “ type may give us an insight into a particular character type found in all periods and communities but we know that already , what they won't do is provide an insight into the prehistoric community in general which is possibly something they might claim . That is the extreme “I” my earlier post was simply about my preferences for a less subjective approach ,i.e. “ Personally I think it is about "them " , and what you or I think is not really that important . “ you and I being less extreme .

If we want to understand the thinking of peoples with different mental lives to our own we have to empathise , where the logic and reasoning comes in is dealing with the dodgy stuff not dealing with the earlier concepts .Whatever may or not be dormant the extreme “I” s , who also tend to be more vociferous have had plenty of opportunity to provide the goods ,they get away with it in religion , new prophets etc starting off their own sects etc , you don't need much evidence for that , but what have they produced in our sphere ?