Why human societies developed so little during 300k years

Re:Why human societies developed so little during 300k years by Avicebron on Saturday April 08, 2023 @01:10PM (#35495369)

> Innovation is an antisocial act to some extent. By innovating you are saying someone is either wrong or less competent than you in some area. You are also challenging traditional roles and systems of social organization.

I think this might be a stretch. I think most group dynamics allow for innovation to some extent.

Yea, if you're weird dick and declare you have "innovated the mighty tent and everyone else is inferior" than you should be rightly thrown out of the tribe.

But, if you can just say "hey I had this idea to put a this animal hide on a couple of branches to keep the rain away, and it's lighter than carrying the cave...I think most people would understand.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why human societies developed so little during 300k years by darkerside on Saturday April 08, 2023 @07:33PM (#35498660)

Envy has its evolutionary roots in something

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why human societies developed so little during 300k years by DubiousPusher on Saturday April 08, 2023 @08:56PM (#35499169)

We definitely have examples of people just flat out rejecting things because they are new. Even small improvements. I think there is room in history for both leaders who are open to invention as long as it doesn't appear destabilizing and leaders who reject almost any change as a potential threat to the fundamental structure of society.

[ Parent | on HN ]