Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!feeds.news.ox.ac.uk!news.ox.ac.uk!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail
From: RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Cultural education of children among hunter-gatherers
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2024 09:05:44 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 32
Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org
Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org
Message-ID: <vhkts9$55pj$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: rokimoto557@gmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89";
	logging-data="80150"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Cancel-Lock: sha1:63jKygjPsARyrLQSNEfTa1a+s1E=
Return-Path: <news@eternal-september.org>
X-Original-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org
Delivered-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org
	id 654E6229782; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 10:05:56 -0500 (EST)
	by beagle.ediacara.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38D88229765
	for <talk-origins@ediacara.org>; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 10:05:54 -0500 (EST)
	id 4A4BC61123; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 15:05:53 +0000 (UTC)
Delivered-To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
	by mod-relay.zaccari.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 178065FD4B
	for <talk-origins@moderators.isc.org>; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 15:05:53 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mod-relay.zaccari.net 178065FD4B
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
	 key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by smtp.eternal-september.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A9265F8D5
	for <talk-origins@moderators.isc.org>; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 15:05:50 +0000 (UTC)
Authentication-Results: name/2A9265F8D5; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com
	id D5465DC01A9; Wed, 20 Nov 2024 16:05:49 +0100 (CET)
X-Injection-Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2024 16:05:49 +0100 (CET)
X-Auth-Sender: U2FsdGVkX1/ScWwg9CiQm8Y/8V+YxDblQhsTWsyk9YI=
Content-Language: en-US
	FREEMAIL_FORGED_REPLYTO,FREEMAIL_REPLYTO_END_DIGIT,
	HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,
	USER_IN_WELCOMELIST,USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.6
	smtp.eternal-september.org
Bytes: 4190

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/11/241119132717.htm

The first thing that should be considered is the disconcerting fact of 
how bankrupt the study of cultural anthropology has had to be to have 
not realized these behaviors much earlier if these findings are 
something worth making claims about at this time.  How blind to reality 
could these anthropologists potentially be in making the claims that 
they are making?  Just as blind as those that came before them?

Their claims are based on observations that should have been made 
centuries ago.  How sad does that make the entire field of cultural 
anthropology?

I know that I am biased.  As an undergraduate at Berkeley I took enough 
lower and upper division anthropology classes to get an AB (the BS 
degree that the College of Letters and Science gave out) if I would just 
take lower division cultural anthropology and upper division cultural 
anthropology.  I had two years to complete those two classes, but I 
refused to do it mainly because I was only interested in getting a BS 
degree in Genetics from the college of Natural Resources, but cultural 
anthropology at the time was just bad science.  I had no interest in 
taking any cultural anthropology courses.  It was basically the Margaret 
Mead generation of cultural anthropology.

Read the science daily article and try to figure out what should not 
have been common knowledge centuries ago?

We just seem to be unable to study ourselves objectively and 
intelligently.  Did these researchers succeed?  Is there something that 
they are still missing?  Are they coming to the wrong conclusions?

Ron Okimoto