raurublock Although Harariās āThe Complete History of Sapienceā and Graeberās āThe Dawn of All Thingsā seem to have opposite claims, they are actually both in the same vein that Western thinkers have long dreamed of: āto concoct a āprehistoric storyā that would explain various questions in a convenient manner. The story is that they are books. You have a point. The Abuses of Prehistory | The New Republic
raurublock I heard that this book gives an overview of the past ādreaming of Western thinkersā and warns against the dangers of such dreaming. Well, it is true that we can learn so much from history! I can learn so much from history! Iām a wise man! The Invention of Prehistory: Empire, Violence, and Our Obsession With Human Origins
Amazon
This article argues that theories about the primitive or prehistoric age of mankind should be treated with caution. The main arguments are as follows.
- the writings of Yuval Noah Harari and David Graeber offer diametrically opposed theories of primitive humanity, but they all belong to the same intellectual tradition that seeks to understand humanity from its deep past.
- interest in prehistory was born out of the repressive world of modernity racism and colonialism and is still poisoned by it. It produces violent and self-centered narratives that prevent self-reflection.
- but some scientists, like Kenneth Oakley, advocated an anti-racist and peaceful theory of origins. Others, like Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, were thinkers who preached equality and unity of all beings, including humanity.
- interest in prehistory is problematic, but it can also be a tool to challenge the oppressive order and to imagine a new reality. Humans have the power to give new meaning to old stories. In short, the article argues that prehistoric theory needs attention but can be useful for egalitarian purposes.
The articleās criticism of the āviolent and self-centered narrativeā refers to the following views on prehistory
- the view that primitive humans were instinctively violent and aggressive. For example, the theory of Robert Ardrey that human society evolved from ākiller apesā.
- the view that civilization is merely a thin āglossā over primitive ābarbarism. For example, the theories of H. Ryder Haggard and Sigmund Freud.
- a colonialist view that viewed people different from modern Westerners as āprimitiveā and āuncivilizedā and used them to justify conquest.
- a view of the entire history of mankind as a single linear narrative leading to the birth of modern Western societies. This leads to an attitude of self-praise that we are the achievement of mankind.
- an attitude of projecting their own concerns onto the past and using prehistory to justify modern man. Common to these views is the portrayal of prehistory as a story of violence and conquest, which is used to justify modern superiority. The authors criticize this as self-centered and harmful.
This page is auto-translated from [/nishio/The Invention of Prehistory](https://scrapbox.io/nishio/The Invention of Prehistory) using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. Iām very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.