Do you agree or not?

Question

Movies about prehistoric humans generally portray early humans as violent and incoherent. However, Quest for Fire in 1982 portrayed humans as both cooperative and competitive; and, with social skills to include language. Gloria Fiero, who has written textbooks on the subject, and others mark civilization as beginning around 8-10,000 years ago. Do you agree? Do you believe prehistoric, that is pre-civilization as defined by the majority of textbooks, humans were capable of communication or not and why, or why not?

Answer 1

Given the nature of human beings today, and to remembe that nature divides things into SPECIES', we can fairly assertain what early humans were like. For most of human evolution we would have been more like animals. Very intelligent animals, but animals. Gradually we evolved to where we began to think a little. HOMO ERECTUS and possibley NEANDERTHAL. Here we would have had some of the traits and savagery of animals but would have began to communicate, cooperate and act less ruthlessly than previous. You see fire was discovered by our GENUS(the general type which species' comes from -eg. the lion and the tiger are of the same genus but different species) sometime approximately about a million years ago.
Gradually we would have gotten more civil in our behavour. And with comming of civilization- implemented laws to such. However, man is a self domesticating animal-but he has to domesticate himself and his young. Humans have the capacity of savagery, a survival instinct, but also the intelligence and character to civility. But by the time that Neanderthal was prominent, we had already started on the way to treating one and other better. For a species that did not would not been able to prosper and would certainly not have developed civilization-whoes operation depends on treating others with cooperation, kindness and consideration. And further more, when HOMO SAPIENS evolved, being human , they had something that no animal has or had- a sense of morals. This is what puts us apart and above everything else upon the face of the earth-alone. So the movie makers should give more credence to that which facilitated our developement to the heights we have attained -our consideration and cooperation and communication with each other. Hope this helps.

Answer 2

When I went through HS many years ago, the writers of text books didn't believe that animals communicated or used tools. My sister's mccaw breaks off his bell and dips it in his water and drinks from the bell on a regular basis. They didn't believe that SA and Africa had once been connected. We know better now. Watch animals. They all communicate so why wouldn't man? Perhaps I define civilization a bit differently than your authors but I see it much, much earlier. Books are only opinions and I find textbooks to be slanted heavily toward what is currently being believed. Use your common sense when you read anything and keep your mind open to different theories. If it quacks like a duck, it usually is a duck. I remember that I asked that teacher if she really belived if SA and Africa and never been joined. She explained she was required to teach what was in the text book but tempered it with that she though in the future it would be discovered that they had been joined. DUH. Of course prehistoric man communicated with other men. They were and still are group animals and there is always some sort of communication between members of a group. They may not have been on Yahoo Answers but you can bet they had a way of getting their thoughts across.

Answer 3

The people of the Neolithic were as advanced as the Natives in North America were prior to Columbus. Because of that, I believe that those people could speak, could organine there tribes in a shockingly complicated fashion, and in that in most ever way, were physically no different than modern man. Many text have a specific definition in mind when they say "civilized" they don't neccessarily mean sub-human when they use the term pre-civilization (which I've never heard before), they merely mean that those tribes don't meet their specific definition of civilized.

Answer 4

Writing was invented by ancient people in Sumeria thousand of years BC. Pre-historic men began invention in the use of tools on building fire or rolling a heavy object. They inhibit the earth with the social knowledge which is the basis of our society today. Culture has its own evolution. Otherwise we dont enjoy civilization as we have now today.

Answer 5

First, early humans certainly communicated in ways that other animals cannot even imagine.

Second, even our recent ancestors homo sapiens may not have imagined themselves and their world as we do. See "The Origin of Consciousness and the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind" amazon.com, paperback.

Third, there are cute ads on tv today that have someone saying, "It's so simple, even a caveman could do it." Cut to two men dressed in fashionable modern clothes but with tufts of black hair growing out of their faces: "That's so offensive!" one says. "I mean: That's really condescending!" agrees the other.

Answer 6

People at that time were capable of painting (Lascaux, Altamira, etc)--I can't imagine they didn't have at least some power of abstract communication.

Answer 7

not