Culture in History

[carmen510]

1. If art was 'never created' (In other words, no maps or stuff), how much of an impact would it have on history?

2. If music was 'never created' (People didn't have war chants, songs, etc.), how much of an impact would it have on history?

3. If literature was 'never created' (Books, although stories in oral format would not be considered literature), how much of an impact would it have on history.

A few interesting questions, although this probably would be impossible.

 

[Sofista]

Even the most primitive people had, and have decorations.

I can't think of humanity, of a species progressing to reason, without aesthetic sensitivities. If art, music and letters didn't exist, it would have been because mankind had never evolved beyind the monkey, and history itself didn't exist.

 

[Maimonides]

1. If art was 'never created' (In other words, no maps or stuff), how much of an impact would it have on history?

A definition of our species is the ability to create art. Hence, no art, no humanity. No humanity, no history.

2. If music was 'never created' (People didn't have war chants, songs, etc.), how much of an impact would it have on history?

I don't see how it's possible to have literacy & art without music.

3. If literature was 'never created' (Books, although stories in oral format would not be considered literature), how much of an impact would it have on history.

History is the written record so your question makes no sense at all. Basically, you are asking what would water be like if water didn't exist...

I don't understand the purpose of these questions. Study prehistory if you want to know what life was like before writing. Study paleoanthropology if you want to know what primates were like before art.

 

[Plotinus]

A definition of our species is the ability to create art. Hence, no art, no humanity. No humanity, no history.

This makes no sense to me. Obviously it's possible to be human and not be able to create art (a baby is human but can't create art). And I see no theoretical reason why something couldn't create art and yet not be human, such as some kind of intelligent alien. So I don't see where you get the idea that art-creation is a definition of humanity, although no doubt it is, in general, a characteristic of it.

I don't see how it's possible to have literacy & art without music.

A deaf person can be literate without being able to hear music, so again, I don't see the connection.

History is the written record so your question makes no sense at all. Basically, you are asking what would water be like if water didn't exist...

Unless of course he means "history" in the sense of "what happened"!

I don't understand the purpose of these questions. Study prehistory if you want to know what life was like before writing. Study paleoanthropology if you want to know what primates were like before art.

Now I'd agree with you here. You might as well ask how history would have been different if we'd all been eighteen-foot tall lizards. The imagined situation is so radically different from the actual one that it's unanswerable.

 

[carmen510]

Okay, so pretend all humans were blind and deaf, how would history be affected?

 

[Maimonides]

This makes no sense to me. Obviously it's possible to be human and not be able to create art (a baby is human but can't create art). And I see no theoretical reason why something couldn't create art and yet not be human, such as some kind of intelligent alien. So I don't see where you get the idea that art-creation is a definition of humanity, although no doubt it is, in general, a characteristic of it.

I was speaking of our species as opposed to any others. As you said, a newborn human can't appreciate art, but it will when it grows up.

I hadn't considered theoretical species like extraterrestrials. My response was refering to known species.

I should probably have been more specific & said that art was a defining characteristic of our species. I didn't mean that art is the entire definition of us.

A deaf person can be literate without being able to hear music, so again, I don't see the connection.

Again, I was speaking of our species as a whole. A healthy human adult can appreciate art. The deaf can learn about music through feeling the sound vibrations or electronically converting sound into light. Mozart was very deaf IIRC. A better example for you might be someone in a coma, but, again, I wasn't speaking of unusual circumstances within humanity. I was speaking of our species as opposed to others.

I was also trying to point out that music is a form of art & that humans require literacy for very complex music. By asking about art in question #1, music in question #2 & literacy in question #3, carmen510 didn't seem to understand that.

Unless of course he means "history" in the sense of "what happened"!

I know, but that's not what history means.

Now I'd agree with you here. You might as well ask how history would have been different if we'd all been eighteen-foot tall lizards. The imagined situation is so radically different from the actual one that it's unanswerable.

That's the point I was trying to get across to carmen510.

Okay, so pretend all humans were blind and deaf, how would history be affected?

We'd be extinct. Actually, without sight or hearing, we'd have never even evolved to Homo sapien sapien. Without sight & hearing, we'd need a fantastic sense of smell & touch & we'd be forced to live underground like moles to avoid predators.

The more interesting question to me is: why are you asking this? Unless you're looking for responses for a philosphical essay assignment in school, I've been caught feeding a troll...

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

This is like all those "how would the world be different without religion" threads that pop up from time to time in OT. The fact is, creating art and culture is (like religion) so much a fundamental part of who and what we are as humans that it is about as relevant as asking what we would be like without opposable thumbs.

 

[Heretic_Cata]

This is too much like butterfly effect thingy to me. My mind cannot begin to hypothesise on smthing like this. And, the way i see it, it seems rather pointless.

This whole thing has a "nasty" name to it: " mental m*********** ".

Okay, so pretend all humans were blind and deaf, how would history be affected?

Evolution would probably make our other senses super extra good or we'd evolve some other sense(s).

 

[North King]

Assuming physiology is the same, no music would probably mean no civilization to have a history of. Communication probably evolved as a side by side development of talk and music; without either one, we'd probably have no ordered societies. We'd be even less than the oft-maligned hunter-gatherer tribes.

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

What is wrong with hunter-gatherer tribes? Farming was invented only about 5% of the history of the human species ago, so the "normal" human, archaeologically speaking, has been a hunter-gatherer.

 

[North King]

What is wrong with hunter-gatherer tribes? Farming was invented only about 5% of the history of the human species ago, so the "normal" human, archaeologically speaking, has been a hunter-gatherer.

I never said anything was wrong with them. I said "oft-maligned", yes, but I never said who was doing the maligning. In fact, they probably had a much more stable, sustainable way of life than we do... However, I contend that without music, we wouldn't even be hunter-gatherers. We would be on the level of a widespread primate, with only the most basic social interactions.