Quote:
Originally Posted by Phage0070
Oh, absolutely. I just meant that people came together basically because of "strength in numbers". This helped people hunt and other such mundane activities, but it also helped to keep people safe from other less friendly people. My point was that you cannot conclude people are naturally non-violent by observing that there is little violence in a system likely shaped in part by the threat of violence.
|
When did I ever use the phrase non-violent? This thread started with morals and religion, and going off that I compared morals with government and our society's current thought of humans being extremely barbaric before civilization. Because many have concluded that morals come from a social force, government, like religion, is not needed to create morals so therefore the hunter gatherer tribes were most likely just as moral as we are today, just much more diverse.
I already said I do not believe in any Daniel Quinn hunter gatherer utopia ideas and I never had said non-violent but I'm questioning where people get this idea that these people were constantly raiding eachother? Because you suggest that people created civilizations in response to attacks also suggests that these raids must have been on a high level to create such a revolutionary idea.