Re: paragraph 3 it’s got nothing to do with our brain size.
Paragraph 3: I think it’s a mistake to lump all actions taken by humans and their institutions into one big verb and label it “humans destroy sustainable ecologies”. Capitalist logic destroys nature, including humans, for profit. The incentive is built into the system. People like us are probably doing all we can to sustain and rejuvenate nature. When you put us all in the same bucket it flattens and obscures the system responsible and the power dynamics that keep it in place. If the goal is to secure a future livable planet we must transition to a political economic system that prioritizes well-being over profit. That’s not capitalism.
I fully realise that some people understand our current situation and are attempting to change it, but when taking the macro view of an entire species as a collective whole, a broad brush is required. To assess the actions every individual member of H. Sapiens Sapiens would require typing 8.2 billion paragraphs, which I can't imagine anybody actually reading.
But modern humans began agriculture 14.5K ybp and in doing so, stepped outside of that synergistic system and began deliberately changing their environment.
As for the Neanderthal brain, there's no way of knowing what particular function that extra brain mass might have performed, but in evolution genetic changes only persist in a species if they are adaptive - that is they improve the chances of the species' survival. The logic of Natural Selection would suggest that, if the larger brain played no part in that survival, and you have to admit 200,000 yrs is a pretty good innings, then that adaptation would not have persisted.
But I definitely agree with you Lizzy that Capitalism, which I hold to be an unfortunate side effect of the agricultural revolution ( collateral damage if you will ) is now the main driver of our stampede towards annihilation.
good description of nature in paragraph 1.
Re: paragraph 3 it’s got nothing to do with our brain size.
Paragraph 3: I think it’s a mistake to lump all actions taken by humans and their institutions into one big verb and label it “humans destroy sustainable ecologies”. Capitalist logic destroys nature, including humans, for profit. The incentive is built into the system. People like us are probably doing all we can to sustain and rejuvenate nature. When you put us all in the same bucket it flattens and obscures the system responsible and the power dynamics that keep it in place. If the goal is to secure a future livable planet we must transition to a political economic system that prioritizes well-being over profit. That’s not capitalism.
I fully realise that some people understand our current situation and are attempting to change it, but when taking the macro view of an entire species as a collective whole, a broad brush is required. To assess the actions every individual member of H. Sapiens Sapiens would require typing 8.2 billion paragraphs, which I can't imagine anybody actually reading.
But modern humans began agriculture 14.5K ybp and in doing so, stepped outside of that synergistic system and began deliberately changing their environment.
As for the Neanderthal brain, there's no way of knowing what particular function that extra brain mass might have performed, but in evolution genetic changes only persist in a species if they are adaptive - that is they improve the chances of the species' survival. The logic of Natural Selection would suggest that, if the larger brain played no part in that survival, and you have to admit 200,000 yrs is a pretty good innings, then that adaptation would not have persisted.
But I definitely agree with you Lizzy that Capitalism, which I hold to be an unfortunate side effect of the agricultural revolution ( collateral damage if you will ) is now the main driver of our stampede towards annihilation.