I didnt mean to imply an analogy between adaptation and change. And you are right, primitive cultures tend to be static. Which brings up the question that is central: how then did civilization develop? Anthropology does not look for models of the ancients in living cultures, it looks to them as a comparative model, how do *these* people adapt to their environment, and what could this say as to how *those* people once did? How does this compare to the archaeology? This is where anthropology begins as an integrated discipline, archaeology, paleontology, ethnography, all interact to try and develop a comprehensive view of our past, and how our present has developed.
Well, Im off for the day. Time to go home and sleep! I'll be back for more mayhem on Wednesday. ;) |
