Featured Title:
Redhead, the new thriller by Ian Cook 'a compulsive read' |
 |
| The Significance of Monuments |
 |
| Login |
|
Don't have an account yet? You can create one. As a registered user you have some advantages like your own home page, fewer ads, and your contributions link to your page. |
| Who's Online |
There are currently, 108 guests and 2 members online.
You are a guest. To join in, please register for free by clicking here |
| |
Forum: Stones Forum
Moderated by : Andy B , TimPrevett , coldrum , Klingon , MickM , TheCaptain , bat400 , davidmorgan , Runemage , SolarMegalith , sem
Respond to: The Prehistory of Compassion
|
| Review your Reply |
ryszard
Joined:
16-10-2003
Messages: 53
from Canada
 OFF-Line
|  New Message Posted!2013-02-08 21:25
Just saw the part where it seems that the authors think that co-operating in dangerous hunts is somehow evidence of compassion. This ignores the fact that pack animals by definition share danger in their hunts, whether they be wolves, the lionesses of a pride of lions, or African wild dogs etc.
These all suffer frequent injuries in their dangerous calling, some of which can be fatal.
It all seems to point to a certain bias in this scientific report.
The political side of all this is not my business as I know little about the details of it.
|
ryszard
Joined:
16-10-2003
Messages: 53
from Canada
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2013-02-08 21:10
I read the first two chapters.
The significant fact for me in all cases was that the remains were "found". They appear to have been well preserved and therefore were probably buried with care. This in contrast to remains of not disabled individuals of the same period. The possibility arises that the disabled were members of an "elite", relatives of chiefs of family or tribe, of their magic medicine-men and women, of their "priests", or they might have been those personages themselves. In these cases "compassion" might be compulsory for the rest of the group.
What is the number of finds with disabilities as a percentage of total finds of the same period?
Also I question the absence of "compassion" in other animals than humans. Old descriptions of elephant hunts show frequent examples of elephants helping wounded elephants, often at the risk of their own lives.
Mother birds and animals often defend their young, and often stay to "grieve" over their dead offspring. We are pleased to label this as "instinct", gratifying ourselves with the word compassion, which might just be an extended instinct.
[ This message was edited by: ryszard on 2013-02-08 21:12 ]
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7006
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2013-01-30 23:12
No prob Sem, it's good to bring out some examples for people who can't or won't read that entire paper.
Interesting observation JonM, a number of us on here are touched by such things. I'll take the reply to yours offline.
|
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 1710
from Bridgend,S.Wales
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2013-01-30 21:34
Ooops, should have checked the http://www.york.ac.uk/media/archaeology/documents/staff/staffpersonalfiles/Compassion7.pdf
link given by AndyB. The example I quoted is at the beginning of chapter 2 "Evidence for long term care of others" (no pages numbers shown).
In my defence, it was a few years ago I read the book and there was evidence given for and against various hypotheses......
Shut up Sem, you're in a hole so stop digging!
|
sem
Joined:
12-11-2003
Messages: 1710
from Bridgend,S.Wales
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2013-01-30 21:18
The Wisdom of the Bones by Alan Walker and Pat Shipman which is essentially about the Turkana Boy, a homo erectus fossil from c1.5 million years ago, also includes a section on a similarly dated fossilised leg-bone. I can't remember all the details (the book was lent out to someone a long time ago) but flesh on this bone had ossified ie turned to bone, and as such was part of the fossil. The conclusion by a team of medical experts was that this process of ossification would have taken a number of years and the victim would have been totally immobilised for the last 6 months or so of their life!.
In other words, a small group of hunter gatherers whose lives depended on their ability to move, devoted 6 months and possibly the whole group's existence in order to care for one individual!
|
jonm
Joined:
12-07-2011
Messages: 819
from UK
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2013-01-30 18:00
Equally I'm sure this approach to vulnerable individuals was not always present in prehistoric societies, but I'm interested to hear what the evidence is for and against .
Interesting article Andy. Not sure whether or not the evidence one way or the other could really be conclusive? I am probably too personally involved to comment on the rest. One of the things we're noticing is that the resources being devoted to classifying children with disabilities are being reduced so diagnoses take longer (or not at all): Without a diagnosis, the children cannot be statemented and therefore can't access statutory support. It's all a bit stealth-like.
|
Andy B
Joined:
13-02-2001
Messages: 7006
from Surrey, UK
OFF-Line
| New Message Posted!2013-01-29 23:22
I was very interested to see that research cited in this paper:
The Prehistory of Compassion (PDF) by Penny Spikins, Holly Rutherford and Andy Needham who are researchers in the Department of Archaeology and PALEO at the University of York
is inspiring an eloquent campaigner against the current cuts to disability benefits:
"They say, the past is another country, they do things differently there. The implication being that we are somehow better now than then, better here than elsewhere. But are we?
Once upon a time all people lived in small communities, with disabled people at their hearts.
Communities that through the arrogance of time, we look back upon and consider less civilised than ourselves. But were they? Or have we just misunderstood the message in the adage?
Skeletal remains teach us that tens of thousands of years ago people with severe disabilities were cared for, loved and if necessary, the entire tribe would adapt to the pace of their disabled member, fully understanding what we today seem to have forgotten – that any society is only as strong as its most vulnerable member.
In another past we lived in villages, accountable to a Lord and Master. Disabled people no longer cherished, but barely tolerated. A different past again tells us that disabled people were considered lucky by leaders, and kept as fools at court. In another, disabled people were unlucky, locked away so as not to contaminate the general population.
A closer past tells us how disabled people were demeaned and dehumanised, labelled as financial burdens worth nothing more than an opportunity for those in power to learn the skills of mass extermination."
More at
http://benefitscroungingscum.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/easy-news-no-ramps-here.html
(with video)
[The rest of Kaila's blog is worth a read as well to see the shocking ways in which the current government are targeting cuts on disabled people, whilst claiming to be protecting the 'most vulnerable']
Equally I'm sure this approach to vulnerable individuals was not always present in prehistoric societies, but I'm interested to hear what the evidence is for and against.
| |
|
Main News