Science and the Neolithic Revolution

[Diamond7]

"Science, as we understand it today, did not exist during the Neolithic Revolution, which occurred between 10,000 BCE and 4,500 BCE. However, the Neolithic Revolution was a significant turning point in human history, as it marked the transition from a primarily nomadic, hunter-gatherer lifestyle to a settled, agricultural lifestyle. This transition involved the domestication of plants and animals, the development of farming techniques, and the creation of permanent settlements.
While science as a formal discipline did not exist at the time, the development of agriculture during the Neolithic Revolution involved a great deal of experimentation and trial-and-error. Early farmers would have had to observe the growth patterns of different crops, experiment with different planting techniques, and develop new tools and techniques to cultivate the land. This process of experimentation and innovation is similar in some ways to the scientific method, and it involved a great deal of observation, experimentation, and problem-solving.
In this sense, the Neolithic Revolution can be seen as an early example of the human drive to understand and manipulate the natural world, which is a fundamental aspect of science. However, it's important to note that the development of agriculture during this time was not driven by a formal scientific method, but rather by a practical need to produce enough food to sustain growing populations."

 

[Frank Robert]

"Science, as we understand it today, did not exist during the Neolithic Revolution, which occurred between 10,000 BCE and 4,500 BCE. However, the Neolithic Revolution was a significant turning point in human history, as it marked the transition from a primarily nomadic, hunter-gatherer lifestyle to a settled, agricultural lifestyle. This transition involved the domestication of plants and animals, the development of farming techniques, and the creation of permanent settlements.
While science as a formal discipline did not exist at the time, the development of agriculture during the Neolithic Revolution involved a great deal of experimentation and trial-and-error. Early farmers would have had to observe the growth patterns of different crops, experiment with different planting techniques, and develop new tools and techniques to cultivate the land. This process of experimentation and innovation is similar in some ways to the scientific method, and it involved a great deal of observation, experimentation, and problem-solving.
In this sense, the Neolithic Revolution can be seen as an early example of the human drive to understand and manipulate the natural world, which is a fundamental aspect of science. However, it's important to note that the development of agriculture during this time was not driven by a formal scientific method, but rather by a practical need to produce enough food to sustain growing populations."

You have described the Neolithic Revolution as a time of trial and error.

Here are the five steps of the Scientific Method

• Define a Question to Investigate. As scientists conduct their research, they make observations and collect data. ...
• Make Predictions. Based on their research and observations, scientists will often come up with a hypothesis. ...
• Gather Data. ...
• Analyze the Data. ...
• Draw Conclusions.

 

[Ophiolite]

@Diamond7 your post is in quote marks. What is the original source?

@Frank Robert : to what extent do you feel there is alignment between Diamond7's "trial and error" and your description of the scientific process?

 

[Frank Robert]

@Diamond7 your post is in quote marks. What is the original source?

@Frank Robert : to what extent do you feel there is alignment between Diamond7's "trial and error" and your description of the scientific process?

To be fair there is alignment between the hunters and gathers observing the cereals growing in the wild and using that knowledge for their domestication. I agree that it was "an early example of the human drive to understand and manipulate the natural world."

 

[AV1611VET]

"Science, as we understand it today, did not exist during the Neolithic Revolution, which occurred between 10,000 BCE and 4,500 BCE. However, the Neolithic Revolution was a significant turning point in human history, as it marked the transition from a primarily nomadic, hunter-gatherer lifestyle to a settled, agricultural lifestyle."

Nope.

Adam was placed into the Garden "to dress it and to keep it."

Adam was a gardener, an agriculturalist, a husbandman.

There was no "transition from hunters to agriculturalists."

If anything, it was the other way around.

 

[Diamond7]

Adam was placed into the Garden "to dress it and to keep it."

I thought they were naked and did not wear any clothing. Genesis 2:25. The same word is translated "till" in Genesis 2:5 "there was not a man to till the ground". Today we use the word cultivate.

 

[Diamond7]

There was no "transition from hunters to agriculturalists."

The Bible is clear that God formed Adam from the ground. Genesis 2:7 "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."

You want to reject Science and you want to use your thoughts and imagination to determine what this means. Genesis 6:5 warns us about the imagination, so we need to be careful "The LORD observed the extent of human wickedness on the earth, and he saw that everything they thought or imagined was consistently and totally evil.

 

[Diamond7]

You have described the Neolithic Revolution as a time of trial and error.

Here are the five steps of the Scientific Method

• Define a Question to Investigate. As scientists conduct their research, they make observations and collect data. ...
• Make Predictions. Based on their research and observations, scientists will often come up with a hypothesis. ...
• Gather Data. ...
• Analyze the Data. ...
• Draw Conclusions.

We use the scientific method to study the neolithic revolution. The revolution was "trial and error", not the method we use to study the revolution. At least the idea of "trial and error" comes out of a sixth grade science text book. You can challenge them if you want and maybe they will make a revision in their book to update it.

 

[Frank Robert]

We use the scientific method to study the neolithic revolution. The revolution was "trial and error", not the method we use to study the revolution. At least the idea of "trial and error" comes out of a sixth grade science text book. You can challenge them if you want and maybe they will make a revision in their book to update it.

Thanks for clarifying. We agree that the revolution was trial and error which was the only point of my comment.

 

[Diamond7]

Thanks for clarifying. We agree that the revolution was trial and error which was the only point of my comment.

Yes, but some of the learning gets passed to the next generation, as what they call instinct.

 

[Shemjaza]

Yes, but some of the learning gets passed to the next generation, as what they call instinct.

I don't think it's reasonable to describe stone age cultural and technological developments as instinct.

 

[dlamberth]

I think an important aspect being lost in this discussion is the Animism aspect of the indigenous cultures found in the Shamans and Healers of those times. It's something forgotten because we tend to look through the lens of modern culture. Yes, trial and error played a part, but they also brought in a deep spiritual communion with nature as they worked with plants and animals.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's something forgotten because we tend to look through the lens of modern culture.

Either that, or God put a halt to that as a nation-wide practice.

 

[Diamond7]

Shamans and Healers of those times. It's something forgotten because we tend to look through the lens of modern culture.

Some modern doctors are not much different today. They do a little dance and that is about all they do.

 

[Diamond7]

I don't think it's reasonable to describe stone age cultural and technological developments as instinct.

Instincts are influenced by genetics: A study published in the journal Nature Neuroscience in 2020 found that genetics plays a significant role in shaping innate behaviors in mice. The researchers identified several genes that are involved in shaping instinctive behaviors, such as nest-building and pup retrieval.

Biology professors suggest instincts evolved from learning

(Phys.org)—A pair of biology professors, one with the University of Illinois, the other with Macquarie University in Australia has proposed in a Perspective piece in the journal Science that the traits we see as instinctual in animals were likely learned by ancestors. In their paper, Gene...

phys.org

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/quirks/photographing-a-black-hole-the-curse-of-the-monkey-god-and-as-canadian-as-1.4060794/how-are-instincts-inherited-a-new-theory-says-epigenetics-1.4061129

 

[Shemjaza]

Instincts are influenced by genetics: A study published in the journal Nature Neuroscience in 2020 found that genetics plays a significant role in shaping innate behaviors in mice. The researchers identified several genes that are involved in shaping instinctive behaviors, such as nest-building and pup retrieval.

Biology professors suggest instincts evolved from learning

(Phys.org)—A pair of biology professors, one with the University of Illinois, the other with Macquarie University in Australia has proposed in a Perspective piece in the journal Science that the traits we see as instinctual in animals were likely learned by ancestors. In their paper, Gene...

phys.org

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/quirks/photographing-a-black-hole-the-curse-of-the-monkey-god-and-as-canadian-as-1.4060794/how-are-instincts-inherited-a-new-theory-says-epigenetics-1.4061129

I wasn't disputing the concept of instinct... i just think it's completely unjustified to apply it to human cultural and technological development.

Building stone axes and farms much like building cars and space stations are learned behaviors... not instincts.

 

[Diamond7]

. i just think it's completely unjustified

It may not be proven, yet. That does not make it unjust. People talk about what their ancestors had to endure and they feel as if they are still having to deal with the memory of those traumas. The trauma was unjust to be sure, but that does not make the memory unjust.

 

[Shemjaza]

It may not be proven, yet. That does not make it unjust. People talk about what their ancestors had to endure and they feel as if they are still having to deal with the memory of those traumas. The trauma was unjust to be sure, but that does not make the memory unjust.

I didn't say unjust, I said unjustified... in that there isn't a reasonable excuse for labeling technology as instinct.

Even if there was some evidence for a race memory that would not be the same as an instinct.

If technology were instinctive we'd be able to make everything without being taught... if there was a race memory we'd be able to remember our parents skills even if they didn't have a chance to tech us.

These is evidence for technological developments in the stone age being neither a race memory nor an instinct. Prehistoric populations passed techniques, technologies and possibly spiritual beliefs without interbreeding.

 

[Diamond7]

Even if there was some evidence for a race memory that would not be the same as an instinct.

I suppose instinct is something different. That is what the research seems to focus on is what memory becomes instinct. In the case of race, memory has to do with the trauma that ancestors had to endure. I was talking to a girl once and I had a vision where I could see shackles on her ankles. I did not say anything to her, but I think she knew. Because it was as if the shackles were still there even if they were not as physical as they were for her ancestors.

 

[Shemjaza]

I suppose instinct is something different. That is what the research seems to focus on is what memory becomes instinct.

That is not in evidence.

In the case of race, memory has to do with the trauma that ancestors had to endure. I was talking to a girl once and I had a vision where I could see shackles on her ankles. I did not say anything to her, but I think she knew. Because it was as if the shackles were still there even if they were not as physical as they were for her ancestors.

I've never seen any reasonable evidence confirming humans possessing race memory aside from an empathy for things they have consciously learned about the past.