Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Who’s the First Person in History Whose Name We Know? (2015)

phenomena.nationalgeographic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 136 posts

Re: Who’s the First Person in History Whose Name We Know? (2015)

#41

Post by aaron695 »

erdevs wrote: post #14

The first recorded writer probably was a male, indeed. That's because most ancient societies were blatantly misogynistic. It's unlikely women were afforded the opportunity to be educated or trained in the scholastic, monastic, or financial professions which were most likely to leave some form of written record. So, yeah, the odds, based on historical predicates, are that the first recorded human's name was a male nam…

> But not necessarily (or even likely) because of the author's claim that males seem to be more prone to be early adopters.

You are making up BS to make a SJW argument.

He was obviously referring to the fact pre-societies were male dominated, which you repeat.

So obviously they will adopt things first.

Please don't twist his words to fit your world view.

Normal people knew exactly what he meant. Please stop this trolling.

Re: Who’s the First Person in History Whose Name We Know? (2015)

#42

Post by fdej »

erdevs wrote: post #22
contingencies wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first recorded writer probably was a male, indeed. That's because most ancient societies were blatantly misogynistic. Actually, my understanding is that the emerging reality is more interesting. Pre-agricultural hunter-gatherer societies were non-patriarchal and patriarchal societies only later became the norm with the rise of warlike/raiding and settled agricultural societies which co-evolved and co-depended on…

> Pre-agricultural hunter-gatherer societies were primarily matriarchal and patriarchal societies only later became the norm with the rise of warlike/raiding and settled agricultural societies which co-evolved and co-depended on higher population densities. Okay. Are hunter-gatherers or agricultural societies more likely to have left written records that survive until today?

You claimed that "most ancient societies were blatantly misogynistic". I don't think the current evidence suggests this, unless by "ancient societies" you meant something like "ancient civilizations". I would define the term "ancient societies" as inclusive of pre-agricultural (hunter-gatherer) societies, and then one has to make a distinction. The established view is indeed that ancient hunter-gatherer societies were much more egalitarian than ancient agricultural societies. Exactly which features of agriculture led to the development of (more?) patriarchy is surely still being debated, though.

Re: Who’s the First Person in History Whose Name We Know? (2015)

#43

Post by brador »

schoen wrote: post #8

Other brief discussions about this topic suggesting other candidates: http://www.funtrivia.com/askft/Question114584.html http://ask.metafilter.com/103405/Who-was-the-first-person-in... One Metafilter user ("Riemann") makes the interesting point that a huge number of clay tablets that have been excavated remain untranslated, so it's quite possible that new candidates would turn up over time as scholars examine those a…

Why can't we scan and use OCR with machine learning to automatically translate those clay tablets?

Re: Who’s the First Person in History Whose Name We Know? (2015)

#44

Post by fdej »

WalterBright wrote: post #34
467568985476 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What evidence is there of matriarchy, and how is that defined? I think you're right that today a popular theory among anthropologists is that agriculture led to many inequalities, but like all things ancient, there just isn't much data for anthropologists to draw conclusions from.

> agriculture led to many inequalities Given the starkly different physical strengths between the genders, it's hard to believe that gender roles did not exist before agriculture.

Pre-agricultural societies certainly had a clear division of labor between the genders, but could still have had a high degree of equality in the sense that both women and men had roughly equal power in the communal decision-making.

Re: Who’s the First Person in History Whose Name We Know? (2015)

#45

Post by erdevs »

fdej wrote: post #42
erdevs wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pre-agricultural hunter-gatherer societies were primarily matriarchal and patriarchal societies only later became the norm with the rise of warlike/raiding and settled agricultural societies which co-evolved and co-depended on higher population densities. Okay. Are hunter-gatherers or agricultural societies more likely to have left written records that survive until today?

You claimed that "most ancient societies were blatantly misogynistic". I don't think the current evidence suggests this, unless by "ancient societies" you meant something like "ancient civilizations". I would define the term "ancient societies" as inclusive of pre-agricultural (hunter-gatherer) societies, and then one has to make a distinction. The established view is indeed that ancient hunter-gatherer societies wer…

I agree it would've been even more clear if I used "civilization" instead of "society". Fair point, as more precise language is usually preferable.

Are you saying the main point / logic of my post wasn't clear? It wasn't feasible to consider replacing this one word and evaluate the likely intent? This feels like you're being a bit nitpicky and pedantic.

Still, your point stands. I hope you can concede my point here too...

Re: Who’s the First Person in History Whose Name We Know? (2015)

#46

Post by rangibaby »

brador wrote: post #43
schoen wrote: post #8

Other brief discussions about this topic suggesting other candidates: http://www.funtrivia.com/askft/Question114584.html http://ask.metafilter.com/103405/Who-was-the-first-person-in... One Metafilter user ("Riemann") makes the interesting point that a huge number of clay tablets that have been excavated remain untranslated, so it's quite possible that new candidates would turn up over time as scholars examine those a…

Why can't we scan and use OCR with machine learning to automatically translate those clay tablets?

The same reason that doesn't work for (insert language here). Especially considering that there will be wildly varying scripts and styles of writing.

Re: Who’s the First Person in History Whose Name We Know? (2015)

#47

Post by erdevs »

Retra wrote: post #35
erdevs wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is only with the advent of "civilization", i.e. agriculture, that we find great power differentials, including the power of men over women That is exactly what I'm saying. Do you somehow contend that hunter-gatherers societies are more likely to have left written records that have survived to today?

You're trying to make some kind of argument about what is likely to happen for a single data point defined only by the exceptional circumstances that surround it. More importantly, it doesn't matter what you think is more likely, because there's no way for you to use that information to make a meaningful decision.

Not a single data point. First principles and logical analysis.

Let me put it more simply:

Did hunter-gatherer societies invent more artifacts that survived until today or did agricultural societies? This is an objectively quantifiable actuality we could check.

Which societies that we know about today had developed writing surfaces that persist until today? This is something we can check.

Be reasonable. Clearly, based on everything we know today, we're talking about agricultural societies here, not hunter-gatherer societies.

Re: Who’s the First Person in History Whose Name We Know? (2015)

#49

Post by fdej »

erdevs wrote: post #45
fdej wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You claimed that "most ancient societies were blatantly misogynistic". I don't think the current evidence suggests this, unless by "ancient societies" you meant something like "ancient civilizations". I would define the term "ancient societies" as inclusive of pre-agricultural (hunter-gatherer) societies, and then one has to make a distinction. The established view is indeed that ancient hunter-gatherer societies wer…

I agree it would've been even more clear if I used "civilization" instead of "society". Fair point, as more precise language is usually preferable. Are you saying the main point / logic of my post wasn't clear? It wasn't feasible to consider replacing this one word and evaluate the likely intent? This feels like you're being a bit nitpicky and pedantic. Still, your point stands. I hope you can concede my point here t…

Yes, I was of course nitpicking. The only reason I did so is that others in this thread already seemed to be commenting based on that interpretation of your post, and in the followup comments you all seemed to be talking past each other. I don't disagree with the content of your original post in general.
Post reply on HN