Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge around the Renaissance, with the invention of the printing press.
The farther back we go, the more we have to use tongue-in-cheek definitions of "rapidly".
Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago
21–30 of 274 posts
Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
Theory: there are no humans without language. Consider: what language do you think in?
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... .
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.
Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago
#23I personally believe forms of writing and record keeping are far, far older than we think, having been discovered and forgotten repeatedly. Very hard for something hundreds of thousands of years old to be preserved. Once you can pass on information orally and written through the generations, knowledge will always improve.
Record keeping doesn't need writing. Like Incas with their knotted ropes (probably not how how you call it in English). Also, while some central Asians could read and write (they had courrier relay to deliver letters), their administrative/taxing/military system, the decimal system, worked without any writing for two thousand years, only by making a mark on a wooden branch for each person in an Arban, a mark on anoth…
Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's wild - I am clearly the first sort, because I cannot imagine what "a smooth stream of thought" would even be if it were not expressed in words.
For what it's worth, I used to be certain that I thought in words too. Then I moved to a different country and used a second language often enough that I sometimes think in it. I then realized that there are periods where I think in neither my native language nor in my second language, even when I'm thinking. YMMV of course.
Do you find your domain of thought shifts when you do not think with language? For example, do you feel you are able to do complex reasoning without language?
Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Indeed, there are two types of people in that regard > One thinks in words No. There are people who believe they think in words, because they haven't bothered to examine the question, but there are no people who think in words. Think about the number of people you've ever seen do a double take at the idea that "I don't know how to put this into words".
I absolutely think in words. There are no pictures or whatever other mental model. There is literally a narrative of words and blackness inside head.
Do you prefer lions or tigers? BBQ sauce or ketchup? Green or blue?
I bet you can answer all of these at a moment's notice, but where does your answer come from? Have you ever sat down and tried to reason out which one you like more? Or do you just 'know' the answer and then 'come up' with the justification afterwards?
People can think in words, but it's certainly not their only way of thinking. I think the thinking in words is kind of like "thinking on paper" where you're trying to explicitly reason through something. The thinking process itself seems to be something on a deeper level.
Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
Theory: there are no humans without language. Consider: what language do you think in?
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... .
I'm highly suspicious that the whole "inner vs no-inner monologue" thing doesn't actually exist and has more to do with these things being extremely hard to explain using language, and people describing their subjective experience in subtly different ways.
Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago
#27It’s fascinating to think about the number of PUs (procedural units) it takes to make a modern tool. Something as simple as a modern hammer must number in the thousands and a mobile phone in the millions or billions.
Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
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... .
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…
>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?
Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
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... .
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…
I find it hard to believe that they can't at all imagine what a tree looks like or imagine a face of a friend. I can understand some difficulty in a perfect image, but nothing?
Re: Humans began to rapidly accumulate technological knowledge 600k years ago
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed, there are two types of people in that regard, whose mind is blown (usually) that there is another type. One thinks in words, one has no words but a smooth stream of thought going.
That's wild - I am clearly the first sort, because I cannot imagine what "a smooth stream of thought" would even be if it were not expressed in words.
I don't think in words unless I am speaking, writing, or modeling a conversational interaction. The vast majority of my thoughts are in the form of sense impressions, motor sequences, visualization, or wordless intuition.
I'm sure you think that way too, you probably just layer a narrative over it. The sibling comment about picking up a spoon is an example I sometimes use - see yourself walk to the kitchen, move your hand to open the drawer, pick up a spoon, pour the tea, scoop the sugar. I can describe them but it's not natively linguistic to me.
I'm hell at rearranging furniture or putting together an engine, not so good at positive self talk.