Agriculture and History: Was it necessary?

[mantype3]

Please forgive me for posting this here, i am really not sure in which section this should go. Just today i was reading this article:

http://www.sott.net/article/187533-Original-Fall-of-Eden-Agriculture-is-a-profoundly-unnatural-activity-and-the-worst-mistake-in-human-history

It is about agriculture and the problems it brought. It makes a point:

"It's a case of whether the glass is half full or half empty," says Dr Stock. "Without the surplus of food you get through farming, we couldn't have the runaway technological innovation we see today. For instance, I can spend a lifetime in school, years doing a PhD, and then teach my students everything I know in a few months. They can then go on to become more expert than I am, pushing the boundaries of knowledge. Without agriculture, we wouldn't be able to stack innovation upon innovation."

My question is twofold.
Is this true? Was agriculture necessary for modern technology and related breakthroughs?

And if this is so, was this innovation (modern tech) necessary, in terms of humanity's spiritual growth?

I'm not necessarily looking for right answers, just discussion. What do you think?

 

[mcb]

Technology? Breakthroughs? PhDs? You mean being the sickest generation of humans ever, bathed in chemical and electrical pollution? Yes, it's possible that agriculture was necessary for that to happen. Aren't we fortunate.

 

[Mrs. Peel]

And if this is so, was this innovation (modern tech) necessary, in terms of humanity's spiritual growth?

I'm not necessarily looking for right answers, just discussion. What do you think?

You may want to look through some of the threads in the Diet and Health section that deal with agriculture and the negative effects it has had on our bodies. :)

 

[Laura]

My question is twofold.
Is this true? Was agriculture necessary for modern technology and related breakthroughs?

And if this is so, was this innovation (modern tech) necessary, in terms of humanity's spiritual growth?

I'm not necessarily looking for right answers, just discussion. What do you think?

Both are interesting questions, philosophically speaking.

I sort of think that the answer to number one is "yes" because of the amount of specialization required to achieve certain levels of technology. There is so much infrastructure behind what we consider to be modern conveniences. To make a finely tooled machine, there are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of steps along the path to get to where you can make it. Each part may require additional machines to make for absolute precision. Each element involved may involve mining, refining, casting, molding, extruding, measuring tolerances, and on and on. All of that rests on a large techno-oriented society. Just think about making a lightbulb. Then think about making lots of them...

As to question 2: I think the answer is "no" because I'm thinking that any technology that does not include/involve at least 50% or more input/guidance/energy (of mind or whatever) to operate it, is entropic by nature because it does not incorporate the "life element".

For example, I think that hand spinning wheels and looms are perfectly fine because there is a balance of human and machine input. That sort of thing. There are lots of mechanical things that do not deprive people of honest labor and creative input. When the machines begin to do "volume" things without requiring volume human input, that's when things head toward entropy. That's when human, life itself, begins to be devalued.

 

[mcb]

...

As to question 2: I think the answer is "no" because I'm thinking that any technology that does not include/involve at least 50% or more input/guidance/energy (of mind or whatever) to operate it, is entropic by nature because it does not incorporate the "life element".

For example, I think that hand spinning wheels and looms are perfectly fine because there is a balance of human and machine input. That sort of thing. There are lots of mechanical things that do not deprive people of honest labor and creative input. When the machines begin to do "volume" things without requiring volume human input, that's when things head toward entropy. That's when human, life itself, begins to be devalued.

Tool making and tool using seem to be quite compatible with life. And life itself is a form of technology. The trouble is, what we usually think of as technology would appear to be a gigantic scam, smacking of deep pathological/predatory intent, and claiming to make things better while actually making things worse (entropy with deception? active entropy? 4D STS in action? I don't know).

I have spent my entire adult life working in technology, and I have done almost nothing that directly contributes to life through that work, although my earliest work was related to higher education and that might "count" in some way. I have instead sought to use technology to help counteract the effects of technology. I believe that had I not had so many health problems (themselves most likely a product of technology), I would have sought out something else that had more to do with life itself.

 

[mantype3]

Tool making and tool using seem to be quite compatible with life. And life itself is a form of technology. The trouble is, what we usually think of as technology would appear to be a gigantic scam, smacking of deep pathological/predatory intent, and claiming to make things better while actually making things worse (entropy with deception? active entropy? 4D STS in action? I don't know).

I have spent my entire adult life working in technology, and I have done almost nothing that directly contributes to life through that work, although my earliest work was related to higher education and that might "count" in some way. I have instead sought to use technology to help counteract the effects of technology. I believe that had I not had so many health problems (themselves most likely a product of technology), I would have sought out something else that had more to do with life itself.

Yeah, that makes sense. Most of what we can do with very modern machines would make no sense without the very existence of those modern machines... However i realize that I was really wondering about alternatives to this.

For example, the very infrastructure we are using to share information in real time (the internet) was enabled ultimately by agriculture. Society needs several layers of technical specialization to build computers. If society collapses as a result of ice ages and comets and we lose digital tech, would we be able to develop an alternative to it that works better for the spirit? Data persistence also comes to mind.

...

As to question 2: I think the answer is "no" because I'm thinking that any technology that does not include/involve at least 50% or more input/guidance/energy (of mind or whatever) to operate it, is entropic by nature because it does not incorporate the "life element".

For example, I think that hand spinning wheels and looms are perfectly fine because there is a balance of human and machine input. That sort of thing. There are lots of mechanical things that do not deprive people of honest labor and creative input. When the machines begin to do "volume" things without requiring volume human input, that's when things head toward entropy. That's when human, life itself, begins to be devalued.

Then that means no sitting back and letting machines do hard work for you (algorithms, process automation). Aww bummer... :P

 

[Laura]

Most of what we can do with very modern machines would make no sense without the very existence of those modern machines... However i realize that I was really wondering about alternatives to this.

For example, the very infrastructure we are using to share information in real time (the internet) was enabled ultimately by agriculture. Society needs several layers of technical specialization to build computers. If society collapses as a result of ice ages and comets and we lose digital tech, would we be able to develop an alternative to it that works better for the spirit? Data persistence also comes to mind.

That's another interesting question. Did you read my book "The Secret History of the World and How to Get Out Alive"? I speculated there about possible techno-spirituality of ancient societies. It's obvious to me that they could do things we cannot do today with all our technology and they left no signs of what we, today, call civilization. So I put my speculations about that down. In other words, if we had "higher abilities" for communication, would we need the internet?

Then that means no sitting back and letting machines do hard work for you (algorithms, process automation). Aww bummer... :P

If our higher abilities were fully operational, would we need computers? After all, the brain is more complex than any computer that has ever been built and probably more complex than any one that could be built without life as a direct interface. Or so it seems to me.

 

[mantype3]

Hmm, yeah good point, Laura. I haven't yet read "The Secret History of the World and How to Get Out Alive" since I haven't been able to buy it, but it certainly sounds interesting! I will get it soon.

 

[Alana]

Most of what we can do with very modern machines would make no sense without the very existence of those modern machines... However i realize that I was really wondering about alternatives to this.

For example, the very infrastructure we are using to share information in real time (the internet) was enabled ultimately by agriculture. Society needs several layers of technical specialization to build computers. If society collapses as a result of ice ages and comets and we lose digital tech, would we be able to develop an alternative to it that works better for the spirit? Data persistence also comes to mind.

That's another interesting question. Did you read my book "The Secret History of the World and How to Get Out Alive"? I speculated there about possible techno-spirituality of ancient societies. It's obvious to me that they could do things we cannot do today with all our technology and they left no signs of what we, today, call civilization. So I put my speculations about that down. In other words, if we had "higher abilities" for communication, would we need the internet?

Then that means no sitting back and letting machines do hard work for you (algorithms, process automation). Aww bummer... :P

If our higher abilities were fully operational, would we need computers? After all, the brain is more complex than any computer that has ever been built and probably more complex than any one that could be built without life as a direct interface. Or so it seems to me.

That's along my line of thinking on this subject. Ok, we went that route: agriculture, technology, civilization (as we understand it today). But what if we didn't start with agriculture in the first place? What if we remained hunter/gatherers and did not diminish our intelligence, not to mention our recreational time with the tribe and the family? What would we have created then and where/who would we be today?

Well, I am sure there are many and varied reasons as to why we progressively and collectively took this route sometime in our history, and it might be that we had to, if only to stand here today and look back and make different choices.

And if you think about it, most of our technologies today are based on electricity, which we saw how vulnerable can be during severe storms, or cometary explosions, etc. There must be a better way. And though airplanes are great, we can cross the Atlantic in hours instead of weeks, is it possible that we could have thought of a device to "travel us around" that did not consume so much fuel and be so vulnerable if something goes wrong up there, as an example?

Obviously I have more questions (most of them philosophical than practical) than answers, but it does seem to me that agriculture brought about a very vulnerable technology and civilization.

 

[mcb]

...
That's along my line of thinking on this subject. Ok, we went that route: agriculture, technology, civilization (as we understand it today). But what if we didn't start with agriculture in the first place? What if we remained hunter/gatherers and did not diminish our intelligence, not to mention our recreational time with the tribe and the family? What would we have created then and where/who would we be today?
...

It seems to me that first there was pathology/predation, then agriculture (which was early technology, applied for purposes of preying on humanity), and then more pathology/predation and more "advanced" technology. Not a very auspicious beginning, but one with clear intent (from hindsight) and not friendly to most of humanity. To these predators, technology has been enormously successful. For the rest of us, I don't think so.

There must be other paths, but perhaps not in this particular 3rd density STS world with its particular lessons and the ever-present predator. Without the technology of life itself we couldn't exist in our present form, but then this form of life is a peculiar sort of technology that literally feeds upon itself in ways with which I feel uncomfortable. Perhaps in the big (higher-density) picture this all resolves.

 

[Laura]

Hmm, yeah good point, Laura. I haven't yet read "The Secret History of the World and How to Get Out Alive" since I haven't been able to buy it, but it certainly sounds interesting! I will get it soon.

I'm pretty sure it is in kindle format that can be read on a computer with a special program that is free.

 

[happyliza]

Very interesting on the machine/human input necessary.

I don't think Leonardo di Vinci needed machines for all his creations - even though he designed 'machines' - as per the SOTT article.

Scary the importance that is now given to machines and the possible consequences of things getting out of 'control' too.

 

[mantype3]

Hmm, yeah good point, Laura. I haven't yet read "The Secret History of the World and How to Get Out Alive" since I haven't been able to buy it, but it certainly sounds interesting! I will get it soon.

I'm pretty sure it is in kindle format that can be read on a computer with a special program that is free.

It's not so much the actual cost of the book, so much as actually finding a way to pay for it. I live outside the US and Europe, and I currently don't have a credit card. So actually placing the order is a little complicated, but I guess it's not impossible. If anyone knows a better way for me to pay for it than this one then please tell me, it would be appreciated.

Very interesting on the machine/human input necessary.

I don't think Leonardo di Vinci needed machines for all his creations - even though he designed 'machines' - as per the SOTT article.

Scary the importance that is now given to machines and the possible consequences of things getting out of 'control' too.

Indeed. This very well could be the "Digital" dark age. With a big enough cataclysm all these specialized systems would crash and recovering would be very difficult and time consuming. Kind of like after the fall of Rome.

 

[Muxel]

What if we remained hunter/gatherers and did not diminish our intelligence, not to mention our recreational time with the tribe and the family? What would we have created then and where/who would we be today?

What if psychopathy is part of the natural order - then the very first souled beings experiencing physicality at the dawn of time would've been easily hoodwinked by the psychopaths owing to their innocence and ignorance. And ever since then it's been a cycle, and there never was an Eden except the kind you create for yourself, which a bunch of techno-spiritual people did after the cataclysm that destroyed the Atlantean empire?

 

[Laura]

It's not so much the actual cost of the book, so much as actually finding a way to pay for it. I live outside the US and Europe, and I currently don't have a credit card. So actually placing the order is a little complicated, but I guess it's not impossible. If anyone knows a better way for me to pay for it than this one then please tell me, it would be appreciated.

send an email to sott(at)sott.net and explain the situation and someone will send you pdf copies by email.