←back to thread

Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago

(news.asu.edu)
273 points geox | 2 comments | 17 Jun 24 21:28 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
gcanyon ◴[18 Jun 24 00:41 UTC] No.40712874[source]▶
You have to think that there were breakthroughs in communication technology — not just language in general but possibly also one individual who happened to be good at explaining things, either before or after language, who both taught more people, but also taught them how to teach — that led to step changes in technology.
replies(8): >>40713012 #>>40713840 #>>40713885 #>>40714141 #>>40714994 #>>40716449 #>>40717648 #>>40718490 #
dboreham ◴[18 Jun 24 01:03 UTC] No.40713012[source]▶
Theory: there are no humans without language. Consider: what language do you think in?
replies(7): >>40713064 #>>40713200 #>>40713207 #>>40713659 #>>40713766 #>>40713849 #>>40714603 #
mkl ◴[18 Jun 24 01:09 UTC] No.40713064[source]▶
Quite a lot of humans don't think in language, or do only some of the time, see e.g. https://www.iflscience.com/people-with-no-internal-monologue..., https://www.livescience.com/does-everyone-have-inner-monolog..., https://www.bustle.com/wellness/does-everyone-have-an-intern....
replies(4): >>40713166 #>>40713436 #>>40713482 #>>40714498 #
aurareturn ◴[18 Jun 24 02:12 UTC] No.40713436[source]▶
There are also humans who can’t conjure up an image in their head. Mozilla cofounder wrote a fairly famous piece about his own experience.

https://www.theverge.com/2016/4/25/11501230/blake-ross-cant-...

If there are people who can’t picture and people who don’t have an inner dialogue, I think it lends more credence to the idea that we don’t have free will and are just a bunch of chemicals controlling our behavior. It also makes you think about consciousness and whether it’s even real.

replies(7): >>40713514 #>>40713518 #>>40713749 #>>40714618 #>>40714810 #>>40715359 #>>40715412 #
thfuran ◴[18 Jun 24 02:28 UTC] No.40713514[source]▶
>If there are people who can’t picture and people who don’t have an inner dialogue, I think it lends more credence to the idea that we don’t have free will

That seems like a bizarre leap. What's the connection?

replies(1): >>40713807 #
aurareturn ◴[18 Jun 24 03:29 UTC] No.40713807[source]▶
Because it implies that we only behave based on how we feel, not how we think. The thinking part is an illusion. Therefore, our “consciousness” has no effect on how we behave.

I’m not willing to die on this hill by the way so if someone else comes along and argues otherwise, I’m open to other ideas.

replies(6): >>40713857 #>>40713997 #>>40714515 #>>40714648 #>>40716003 #>>40716344 #
MeImCounting ◴[18 Jun 24 03:41 UTC] No.40713857[source]▶
Thinking isnt even a path to "free will". Thinking is pretty clearly determined by exterior stimulus just like feeling is.
replies(2): >>40714013 #>>40717649 #
1. goatlover ◴[18 Jun 24 13:31 UTC] No.40717649{6}[source]▶
How would thinking be determined by exterior stimulus, when we all vary to some extent to the same stimulus? Behaviorism was found wanting because it didn't account properly for goes on between the ears. And the rest of the body, which makes us individuals. The idea of free will comes from the fact that people do make different choices. We make different choices than our past selves did. From a compatibilist perspective, one could say free will comes from being part of determining what goes on. Things don't just happen to us. We participate in what does happen. We're not simply puppets on the string of the external world. We're just as much a part of causing things as everything else is.
replies(1): >>40719913 #
2. MeImCounting ◴[18 Jun 24 17:01 UTC] No.40719913[source]▶
> How would thinking be determined by exterior stimulus, when we all vary to some extent to the same stimulus?

Because, and this may shock you: we are not all the same person

You make an excellent point that people respond differently to a given stimulus. This is explained by those people having had different genetics, environments, upbringings and even breakfasts leading up to the point of the test. It has been demonstrated that your metabolic state will vastly change your response to stimuli throughout a day.

I ate something different for breakfast today than yesterday because one sounded tastier than the other. I made this decision not because I have an eternal soul making randomized decisions like a roulette machine but because yesterday I craved salty food and today yogurt sounded better. I am different person today than I was yesterday. My gut, brain and everything else has been changed by all the stimulus I experienced yesterday and is now influencing my responses today.