• dr_scientist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    I wrote a great reply that was brilliant and generous and had all the clever bits, and then Lemmy deleted it.
    You’re right, clan-based practices have had and continue to have struggles both with modernisation and basic human rights. They are not idealised Rousseauean societies. But the author is basically saying that this shift in marriage practices is the sole contributor to Western science. It’s a stretch to be sure, and it doesn’t even have the evidence right.
    Here’s a critique with quotes from people way smarter than me.

    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/nov/20/the-weirdest-people-in-the-world-review-a-theory-of-everything-study

    • cyd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes, the “weird” guy definitely over-hyped the hypothesis to sell his book. Fukuyama had a more nuanced take in his book The Origins of Political Order, which was that the church-influenced marriage (and inheritance) practices provided long term benefits by aiding the evolution of the concept of rule of law. But it was only one of a very large number of historical factors.

      • dr_scientist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Haven’t read that, sounds like an interesting take. Thanks for that. I love anything about how ‘order’ was established, since it seems like a given today, but it definitely isn’t.

    • nomadjoanne@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It can be a contributing factor without being the only factor, of course. We can accept the author’s general ideas without accepting all of the conclusions he draws from them.