Re: The origin of personal property
Richard Foy (rfoy@netcom.com)
Fri, 23 Aug 1996 14:46:38 GMT
In article <840741089snz@crowleyp.demon.co.uk>,
Paul Crowley <Paul@crowleyp.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <rfoyDwFxK3.KLy@netcom.com> rfoy@netcom.com "Richard Foy" writes:
>
>> >> Paul Crowley <Paul@crowleyp.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> >> >I can't see personal property developing without fixed home
>> >> >bases. It would be much easier when these also acquired some
>> >> >kind of accomodation or shelter.
>
>> This seems to me to be inconsistant with nomadic small scale cultures
>> of the recent past, at least from what I know of them.
>
>But where did these nomadic small scale cultures come from?
>If "they had always been there" or if they were the primitive
>form, you would have a point. However, since it is generally
>agreed that Hss went through a population bottleneck, all of us
>had the same ancestors. Was that ancestor population nomadic or
>static? Was it (a) we all had static ancestors and some
>subsequently adopted a nomadic way of life or (b) we all had
>nomadic ancestors and some later adopted a static form of life.
I personally think it was a static aquatic population.
>
>I'd say the evidence is in favour of static ancestors. For
>example, the number and range of human parasites indicate fixed
>home bases. Actually, I can't conceive of a nomadic hominid
>form of life without fire, tools, shelter and advanced weapons.
>Furthermore, a static society would make the development of all
>these much easier - as well as other vital institutions such as
>language.
Could you sumarize the reasons each of these would be needed for
nomandic hominids?
--
Western Kundalini; Chakra 5 awakening,
"Always speak, never listen."
I am voting third party except for Debra Bowen the Internets friend
for CA State Assembly. See, http://www.mother.com/Bowen
|