What do you think?
Stone Age Hunters
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review
August 12, 2019
The book’s theme is about the progression of humankind – “the origin of man” or “the process of attaining humanity” -- from the earliest hominid ancestors to hunter-gatherers, a few of which existed at the time of this book (1967). We are organisms in the sense of biological evolution. “[E]ven men of the most advanced civilizations,” Clark writes, “are still regulated and patterned by basic biological facts…All human cultures…subserve the basic aim of life, which is quite simply to survive. Cultural forms which stand in the way of this either change or else disappear from the biological world. This is why archaeology discloses by and large a story of progress.” This story is how culture has evolved to ensure our success and survival.
So far, so good. But in many ways, subtly but authoritatively, with this progress theme Clark perpetuates a mythology about the way humans see themselves. Clark is too fast to leave our animality behind. His focus is about “how” we survive: the tools we develop, the growth of knowledge, and so forth. It is about our mental “progress” that makes us human. This is progress of one sort, but the purposes for which these advances occurred have not changed at all. We survive to replicate as Dawkins and others have observed, and that means the sexual drive – violence as well as love – continues unchanged, as does our need for security and group life (hence, our tribalism, for good and bad). We have a seeking ambition for the things that give us pleasure. This includes rank vis-à-vis others because that gives us greater value, security and material. And, the flip side of seeking, is fear that we will not get what we desire or that we will lose what we have. We see these dynamics in our “savage” ancestors and in ourselves today. This is where the myth, “civilized,” comes in.
Just as Clark observed, culture “subserves” these animal impulses. But Clark oversteps that argument by suggesting that human behavior is no longer constrained by animal “instinct” and that we are to advance humanity because we have mind. It’s the legacy of Plato. The charioteer controls the horses. But Plato and Clark are wrong. The animal within tells us why we act. The human element, how we do what we do and what we do, serves our animal motivations. Clark conflates the two or, rather, highlights the latter and ignores the former. We should not fool ourselves. Though Clark precedes Pinker, his argument is the same: We’re leaving that past behind. But we have our dictators and fascists. And now we have Trump, speaking loud and clear, activating our worst impulses.
So far, so good. But in many ways, subtly but authoritatively, with this progress theme Clark perpetuates a mythology about the way humans see themselves. Clark is too fast to leave our animality behind. His focus is about “how” we survive: the tools we develop, the growth of knowledge, and so forth. It is about our mental “progress” that makes us human. This is progress of one sort, but the purposes for which these advances occurred have not changed at all. We survive to replicate as Dawkins and others have observed, and that means the sexual drive – violence as well as love – continues unchanged, as does our need for security and group life (hence, our tribalism, for good and bad). We have a seeking ambition for the things that give us pleasure. This includes rank vis-à-vis others because that gives us greater value, security and material. And, the flip side of seeking, is fear that we will not get what we desire or that we will lose what we have. We see these dynamics in our “savage” ancestors and in ourselves today. This is where the myth, “civilized,” comes in.
Just as Clark observed, culture “subserves” these animal impulses. But Clark oversteps that argument by suggesting that human behavior is no longer constrained by animal “instinct” and that we are to advance humanity because we have mind. It’s the legacy of Plato. The charioteer controls the horses. But Plato and Clark are wrong. The animal within tells us why we act. The human element, how we do what we do and what we do, serves our animal motivations. Clark conflates the two or, rather, highlights the latter and ignores the former. We should not fool ourselves. Though Clark precedes Pinker, his argument is the same: We’re leaving that past behind. But we have our dictators and fascists. And now we have Trump, speaking loud and clear, activating our worst impulses.
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review