Earlier quoted context omitted.
Disingenuous interpretations of the evidence and stating things as facts that are very much still debated or denied by other experts. A good example: Graeber posits that the European Enlightenment came directly from contact with Native American ideals rather than being a home grown movement. To support this, Graeber repeatedly references a book written by a French Army officer named Lahontan about his travels in Nort…
I honestly don't know your background. Do you have an education and training in anthropology and/or archeology? Maybe you do. When I read the criticisms in the press and blogs about the work, I found it telling that most of the criticism about Graeber and Wengrow's book is from non-experts. While experts seem to find it a breathe of fresh air. I personally don't have enough training and education in anthropology and…
Just because I’m not an anthropologist doesn’t mean I have to take Graeber’s word for everything.