On Wed, 18 May 2005, Keith Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >736. Man's two worlds > >Now that even language differences between man and other primates, such >as bonobo chimpanzees, are not so sharp as thought hitherto, what is >emerging as probably our only unique characteristic as a species is man's >ability to trade.
I think you'll find a strong argument from the proponents of the standard items on that list, such as ability to imagine and plan into the future beyond the next 15 minutes, ability to think in the abstract, knowledge of the inevitability of personal death, etc. [...] >But if a mutation occurred in some groups where the post-puberty girls >were more inclined to wander then these wandering girl-groups, being >physically smaller and less strong than bachelor males would have been in >greater peril. Unless, instead, they were directly exchanged between >groups when the groups met occasionally at territorial boundaries! But >what would have happened if there had been -- as one would normally >expect -- a sexual imbalance between the sexes of the two groups? It is >not too much to speculate that other prized goods would have been used as >a "balance of trade" between two groups. > >We can still see the original direct linkage between sex and trade in the >form of dowries which still obtains in many more "primitive" societies, >such as in the agricultural areas of Asia, Africa and South America. >Indeed, it is not too much to suppose that the surge of young Saudi >Arabian suicide bombers flowing into Iraq is primarily caused because >millions of young males in Saudi Arabia are totally without jobs and >cannot ever save enough money to buy themselves a wife. Thus they are >easily manipulated into believing that their plight is due to other >causes. I think this theory would have better legs if it were not the case that universally (unless you can cite a counterexample) the tradition is that dowries and similar exchanges are given _accompanying_ the females, to their recipient families, as if a bribe to take the women off her family's hands. This decidedly patriarchal slant to the exchange suggests it stems from the patriarchal era, which is to say the sedentary agricultural age. You would have a hard time establishing a pre-agricultural basis for this practice. -Pete _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
