Are people cleverer now than they used to be?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (81 of them)
xpost

i was joking.

i do think that we know comparatively little now in terms of being able to fend for ourselves tho.

barbarian cities (jaybob3005), Thursday, 1 September 2005 12:45 (eighteen years ago) link

i think people are about as clever as ever but maybe less "ignorant" -- we know more *stuff*.

N_RQ, Thursday, 1 September 2005 12:45 (eighteen years ago) link

Sorry, irony detector malfunction. Yeah, I said upthread, a modern day Robinson Crusoe prob'ly wouldn't last a week.

I Ain't No Addict, Whoever Heard of a Junkie as Old as Me? (noodle vague), Thursday, 1 September 2005 12:46 (eighteen years ago) link

I are smarter than yesteryear yup.

Kv_nol (Kv_nol), Thursday, 1 September 2005 12:46 (eighteen years ago) link

i wonder if we put a dude from 2000 years ago in a fight now with a dude from now, no weapons allowed, who would win.

the 2000 year old dude may well have more muscles etc. but then again the dude from now might know MARTIAL ARTS (or have at least watched WWE)

ken c (ken c), Thursday, 1 September 2005 12:47 (eighteen years ago) link

but thinking we know more stuff makes us stupider, surely

there's also the whole case for information overload making us stupider. the internet's kinda overwhelming innit.

barbarian cities (jaybob3005), Thursday, 1 September 2005 12:48 (eighteen years ago) link

we now know too much for our own good!!

ken c (ken c), Thursday, 1 September 2005 12:49 (eighteen years ago) link

the 2000 year old dude may well have more muscles etc. but then again the dude from now might know MARTIAL ARTS (or have at least watched WWE)

-- ken c (pykachu10...), September 1st, 2005.

mai non, he would be about 5ft tall, i think. less well-built anyhoo.

N_RQ, Thursday, 1 September 2005 12:50 (eighteen years ago) link

maybe the adage 'it's not size, it's what you do with it that counts' would apply to a vicious, hirsute neanderthal accustomed to tearing apart frightening animals with only his hands and teeth.

barbarian cities (jaybob3005), Thursday, 1 September 2005 12:52 (eighteen years ago) link

Yeah, my money would be on the 2000 years ago bloke. He'd fight way dirty.

I Ain't No Addict, Whoever Heard of a Junkie as Old as Me? (noodle vague), Thursday, 1 September 2005 13:06 (eighteen years ago) link

haha like rick flair

ken c (ken c), Thursday, 1 September 2005 13:10 (eighteen years ago) link

we seem more dependent but i don't think we are. the advances made by people in the past seem incredible - building bridges without computers at all, etc., and it seems like an incredible leap to go from no bridges to bridges. but i think the leaps we make today are as important, even if we're standing on the shoulders of giants. it's impressive that people could figure out not only concepts but the values of things like gravity, seemingly from scratch, but what we do with those inventions/discoveries is also impressive. plus, more people have greater access to more knowledge, which is a feat, even if human capacity for great thinking is a constant over time.

carly (carly), Thursday, 1 September 2005 13:12 (eighteen years ago) link

Keep in mind that before radio, television, and recorded sound, people had to MAKE their own entertainment. Skills in conversation and repartee were probably more valued; wit couldn't be imported through the airways. I imagine people are less interesting now, as a rule.

Robert T., Saturday, 3 September 2005 01:05 (eighteen years ago) link

i think we are much more dependent (tho i totally agree with the rest of your post, carly), but the other side of the coin is that we have the potential to be much more dependable in large collectives because of the sheer amount of technology and communication at our disposal, so that doesn't necessarily have to be a problem. clearly this week is showing that it is a problem, we're not following through with all the potential we have, so i'm kind of pessimistic about cleverness in terms of problem-solving (as opposed to learning massive amounts of information, which i think we've become quite good at).

Maria (Maria), Saturday, 3 September 2005 02:24 (eighteen years ago) link

I always joke that if you dropped my parents off in a forest and came back in 9 mos, you'd find them having tea on their porch (house built by my dad and full of labor-saving devices) and wearing linen suits (my mother having grown the flax and etc). This *probably* isn't entirely true but they are MASSIVELY resourceful people. I will be proud to carry on even a portion of their skills (although I take a pass on the crochet -- HOW MANY DOILIES does one family need??).

I am, however, really interested in the ways thought patterns change, esp the whole pre-literate thing and the increased reliance on symbol & metaphor and how that's tied to religious beliefs. Not that I've done any heavy reading on the subject, you understand -- but I will! Erm, might.

I haven't answered the orig question, so shoot me -- but haven't we resolved this silly issue already?

Laurel, Saturday, 3 September 2005 02:44 (eighteen years ago) link

Unwitting a cow would not appear to require much in the way of "cleverness"

That's stupidity and docility are two of the things cows have been bred for. You try outwitting an auroch - the wild cow, about 50% larger than a modern cow and a hell of a lot smarter and more aggressive.

Oh, and with pointier horns too.

I find it astonishing that people did things like build bridges and castles and huge buildings WITHOUT THE AID OF COMPUTERS OR CALCULATORS OR POWER TOOLS OR EVEN ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS SOMETIMES in the olden days. Which nobody would even attempt today to put up a shed, let alone London Bridge. (OK, that fell down seven times, but lots of other things are still standing.)

The things that are still standing were hugely over-engineered, mostly by accident. It was only in the 20th century that materials science at all developed as a subject, and engineers started to learn things such as: how dangerous things like sharp steps and corners are.*

Medieval cathedrals were built over several decades, largely by trial and error. If it looks like it's going to fall outwards, you add extra flying buttresses. If the foundations start moving, you either start again or do your best to make stuff lighter (see: Ely cathedral). If it looks like it's going to fall inwards, you try to add flying buttresses on the inside of the building (see: Wells cathedral).

People used to play instruments more too but only because they were desperately waiting for somebody to invent the gramophone.

OTM. Instead of buying an album, you'd buy the sheet music for the latest popular songs and learn to play them yourself.

personally, i despair of "people" ... but that's mostly because i've just had a particularly idiotic e-mail from our IT department, who have sunk to an all-time low.

Hurrah for IT!

* the rules for this are rather non-intuitive. If you drill a hole in a stressed object, the stress around the hole is multiplied by three whatever the size of the hole. If it's a square hole, the stress at the corners is multipled a couple of hundred times.

Forest Pines (ForestPines), Saturday, 3 September 2005 06:25 (eighteen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.