Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

All_The_Dang_Time t1_isfzsaq wrote

Often people label earlier civilizations as “primitive” (which I take to mean less intelligent.) What are some examples of ways they were superior in intelligence?

4

en43rs t1_isg2etx wrote

>some examples of ways they were superior in intelligence?

None. Because no civilization is superior in intellect to another.

When talking about "primitives" people take for metric: knowledge of technology, complexity of political structure (which are usually way more complex than what outsider see). They say they are less intelligent because they assume that if they don't have steel/guns/wheel/boats/kings/huge buildings, it's because they can't, as if anyone anywhere could come up with those on the fly. While in reality we only develop those technologies if we have the need to. You need specific circumstances, not a bigger brain.

Societies are not more intelligent nowadays that they were 15 000 years ago.

14

Razkal719 t1_isggftz wrote

The term refers to technological level and has no relation to intelligence. Stone age tech is more primitive than Bronze age which is less advanced than Iron. Primitive usually refers to societies who are at the Stone Age level of technology. The Maya were used stone edged weapons and the only metals they used were gold and silver. And yet they had advanced calendars and mathematics. Sadly most all of their many written codexes were burned by religious fanatics Catholic missionaries.

9

[deleted] t1_isgj557 wrote

[deleted]

6

CrudelyAnimated t1_isgp2jv wrote

> obsidian knives were far sharper and more precise than metal knives. Even today some surgeons prefer obsidian to steel, in fact.

And they kill White Walkers. So if a surgeon loses the patient, there's that to not worry about.

7

All_The_Dang_Time t1_isgolvb wrote

Thank you y’all! This has been really informative! Is there tech that is still used today besides knives and swords?

1

Razkal719 t1_ish295m wrote

As Bentresh said, all of our tech is the end of a long line. Without writing we have no history of the source for so many things. For me the most prevalent is textiles and cordage and basketry. In only a few instances do these items get preserved and yet we still use ropes and shoe laces and now we weave items out of carbon fiber.

1

diosexual t1_ish9yp6 wrote

Fire, not just for cooking, the slash and burn method for cultivation.

1

elmonoenano t1_isgvc8l wrote

You're seeing pushback from the other posters about the term "primitive" which is inherently a value judgment. It's generally a term that's not used in history when talking about cultures. It will sometimes be used to talk about specific technologies in relation to one and other. It's usually used in the sense that some technology were a primitive version of another technology, like roman numerals being a more primitive system than a number system that has the concept of zero.

B/c of that, and the way cultures evolve, every society will have systems that are more or less advanced than other systems. While the US may have the more advanced cruise missile systems in the world, our health care system is a target of mockery for large sections of the rest of the world.

And often the system that's seen as primitive is actually too advanced for the judging group to understand. A good example is the Conquistador's impression of Tenochtitlan's system of hydro-logical urban planning. They tore it apart and to this day Mexico City has problems with flooding and water shortages b/c of a lack of understanding of the valley's hydrology.

1