Author of the Month :  The Official GrahamHancock.com forums
Join us at this forum every month for a discussion with famous popular authors from around the world. 
Welcome! Log InRegister
Gary, you link haplotypes to assumed cultural differences by rhetoric. We do not need genetic differences for war. One unhappy family.
You agree that “the subconscious model of culture is valid to an undetermined and perhaps undeterminable degree.” Yet there is no such generally agreed model yet. The paradigm of isolationism is as conscious, ‘evolutionary’, and diffusionist as your migration pradigm.
I have developed the work of Levi Strauss to isolate about 100 features of the core content of culture, and a model to demonstrate that about 60% of these features are always present, always in the same five layers of structure, in all artworks and building sites. Thus a vast track of subconscious behaviour is no longer indeterminate. We now have some rigorous conscious evidence of, and some access to, subconscious behaviour, and thus to the role of archetype in culture. No Kumbaya (see my paper on semiotics in Expression, Atelier Etno).

Cultural similarities that you imagine to trace along certain routes, are isolated stylistic markers that mutate fast, even in temporarily static societies (and often faster, a kind of ‘island effect’ as in Homo Florensis).
Of course there are many intercultural influences, more than you can shake a bull roarer at, but your examples equally demonstrate universal elements in various media; cosmology, geometry, myth, ritual (the language sounds results I mentioned in my previous comment, is Blasi et al). I engage with you to get an update on correspondence theory applications in anthropology, but you just pile up evidence of various migrations to the Americas, as if that would lead us to the source of culture. And ironically, you bash modern migrations as if that did not change ancient American cultures.

Your "Celtic crosses" at Driekops Eiland near Kimberley are probably textiles, items of ritual dress decoration of beadwork in leather thongs on headbands, front and rear loincloths, aprons, etc, probably a former annual San, more probably Khoe and Kora (up to Koranna) female initiation site (see recent work of Hollmann on Gestoptefontein).
They would not have known a Celt if they saw one. A Celt would not have recognised the Kora ensemble. Occasional marriage is an unlikely cause for some of the engraved motifs. Intermediate trade items are likely, but cultural elements are easily assimilated, since the core content is already present on both sides (see Japanese comic books and pop art). I study core content of behaviour in a universal paradigm. You study stylisation as if it were ‘culture’. See my magazine edition on Celtic beasts, on
[stoneprintjournal.wordpress.com]

Every culture uses crosses and cosmology, not implying that they are Celts, or astronomers. Your ‘Celts’ remind me of Boudet (‘True Celtic language’) and his elaborate punning prank using the sound of Occitan and any and all other place names in southern France. This kind of correspondence just obfuscates the meaning of terms such as ‘Celt’ and ‘cross’.

Your San (Bushmen) visited by sailors (Phoenicians, Dravidian Indians, etc) did not seem to take much culture from the occasional sailor who ventured beyond the Swahili traders on the coast. San were very numerous, and spoke about five different language groups.
Your swastika is just another mandala, cross and vortex combined, too broad in correspondences to isolate as an archetype.

DNA maps do not match with cultural ensembles yet, nor with language. Thus it holds “great promise for a viable picture of our past,” as you say. I agree with you that there were several seaborne migrations to the Americas, but the culturally significant ones were relatively recent, thus few mutations to track. I favour Indonesian and Chinese migrants going ‘native’ on the American west coasts. Same repertoire, stylistic mutation; jump start in water engineering.

We disagree on what causes, or rather what sustains culture; and cognition. Your “qualitatively different consciousness and cognitive dissonance” at cultural contact is a socio-economic function. Not different wiring. Not different myths. Not different art. Different in population density and organisational maturity. Slightly different stages of technology. Recall the British justifications for genocide in India.

You go back to Neanderthals meeting Sapiens to demonstrate your paradigm of culture differences. Yet those meetings occurred many times, for thousands of years. Long enough for us to carry a few percent Neanderthal markers, and perhaps more in the ‘junk’ or timing vector genes that are still not decoded. Ditto for Denisovans and Sapiens. (see my article on Naledi near Johannesburg on
[stoneprintjournal.wordpress.com]
These issues are not directly relevant to our differences on what culture and cognition is. Correspondence theory is not likely to resolve these issues.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 16-Apr-18 13:02 by Edmond.

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Views Written By Posted
Cultural Diffusionism vs. Cultural Isolationism 1333 gadavid 10-Apr-18 22:17
Re: Cultural Diffusionism vs. Cultural Isolationism 199 Edmond 14-Apr-18 09:47
Re: Cultural Diffusionism vs. Cultural Isolationism 160 gadavid 15-Apr-18 20:23
Re: Cultural Diffusionism vs. Cultural Isolationism 183 Edmond 16-Apr-18 12:53
Re: Cultural Diffusionism vs. Cultural Isolationism 159 gadavid 17-Apr-18 19:26
Re: Cultural Diffusionism vs. Cultural Isolationism 159 gadavid 17-Apr-18 23:34
Re: Cultural Diffusionism vs. Cultural Isolationism 159 Edmond 18-Apr-18 10:00
Re: Cultural Diffusionism vs. Cultural Isolationism 144 gadavid 18-Apr-18 22:18
Being hard wired 161 drrayeye 19-Apr-18 06:24
Re: Being hard wired 155 Edmond 19-Apr-18 08:54
Re: Being hard wired 147 Aine 19-Apr-18 12:34
The scientific literature 160 drrayeye 19-Apr-18 13:26
Re: Being hard wired 148 gadavid 19-Apr-18 22:54
Re: Being hard wired 158 gadavid 19-Apr-18 23:18
Re: Being hard wired 161 Edmond 20-Apr-18 07:32
If you want tobe taken seriously by scientists 168 drrayeye 20-Apr-18 15:22
Re: Being hard wired 147 Eddie Larry 20-Apr-18 16:58
Re: Being hard wired 148 gadavid 21-Apr-18 05:08
Re: Being hard wired 144 Edmond 21-Apr-18 14:53
Re: Being hard wired 145 Eddie Larry 21-Apr-18 17:27
Re: Being hard wired 128 gadavid 22-Apr-18 21:52
Re: Being hard wired 179 gadavid 22-Apr-18 22:01
Re: Being hard wired 136 Edmond 23-Apr-18 09:29
Re: Being hard wired 137 gadavid 23-Apr-18 22:21
Re: Being hard wired 127 Edmond 24-Apr-18 10:30
Re: Being hard wired 146 gadavid 24-Apr-18 23:23
Re: Being hard wired 156 Edmond 25-Apr-18 09:21
Re: Being a hard wired pain 151 MDaines 25-Apr-18 10:57
Re: Being hard wired 251 gadavid 25-Apr-18 19:38
Re: Being hard wired 152 Eddie Larry 19-Apr-18 18:31
Re: Cultural Diffusionism vs. Cultural Isolationism 195 Poster Boy 14-Apr-18 16:56
Re: Cultural Diffusionism vs. Cultural Isolationism 165 gadavid 16-Apr-18 00:15
Re: Cultural Diffusionism vs. Cultural Isolationism 160 drrayeye 17-Apr-18 21:56
Re: Cultural Diffusionism vs. Cultural Isolationism 150 gadavid 17-Apr-18 23:19
Re: Cultural Diffusionism vs. Cultural Isolationism 160 drrayeye 18-Apr-18 08:09
Re: Cultural Diffusionism vs. Cultural Isolationism 168 gadavid 18-Apr-18 22:30
Re: Cultural Diffusionism vs. Cultural Isolationism 152 drrayeye 19-Apr-18 05:26
To disprove a theory, all that is needed is a single true counter factual 145 Race Jackson 24-Apr-18 00:06
Re: To disprove a theory, all that is needed is a single true counter factual 150 Edmond 24-Apr-18 10:39


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.