WORTH A LOOK

Saturday Links 17-Mar-2018 Human tools 320k years old, Children and paychecks, Drake plays Fortnite, astronaut DNA by Nathan Taylor (praxtime) Commentary and links on what I found interesting to read this week. 1. Middle Stone Age Tools 320k years old. Homo erectus (our ancestors) usedAscheulean stone hand axes. These are big pear shaped rocks for cutting and pounding. Whereas Homo sapiens used more advanced stone tools, termed Middle Stone Age. These include spear tips, scrapers, awls, etc. So the news this week is a paper Long-distance stone transport and pigment use in the earliest Middle Stone Age, pushing back the date of Middle State Age tools to 320k years ago. That's 30k years earlier than previously known. These tools were also associated with pigment use, and transport of obsidian 100 km away, which implies trade networks. The main point is this new paper adds more support for a major shift in how we think humans evolved. The old view: Homo sapiens evolved modern physical form first, then only became modern behaviorally roughly 100-200k years later. See the wikipedia page behavioral modernity. Newer rising view (not yet reflected in wikipedia): Homo sapiens evolved out of the box with modern behaviors, or they followed very closely.  Link to excellent Ed Yong piece. COMMENT Interesting news, at least for me. Adam Smith was interested in the human past but without modern data. He speculated in his use of the four-phase hypothesis: savagery associated with human groups in the Forest; humans into primitive farming and hunting; agriculture and property; truck, barter and exchange; emerging into commerce ('at last'). {Lectures on Jurisprudence, 1762-3). Those periods are worthy of modern studies with reliable data. Perhaps source for my (last?) book.

Good Essay but Flawed

Eva Schlunke posts (9 March) on PCES a ‘Guest Post’: ‘Dr Smith’s Prophylactic’

HERE: http://www.post-crasheconomics.com/dr-smiths-prophylactic/

This readable essay is typical of its type, where its author summarises what she believes is an honest presentation of Adam Smith’s life and contributions to 18th-century social and intellectual life and its eventual absorption into the history of ideas.

“From his townhouse window in Glasgow, overlooking a crowded marketplace, he watched people and pondered their motivations. He was curious, and he was there, a spectator at the delivery of the birth of the industrial revolution.”

Eva starts of her account revealing her imagination, not historical facts. Smith did not live in a Glasgow town house. As a student he lived on campus or in rented accommodation, which was an impressive set of buildings besides Glasgow’s Cathedral. As a Professor he also lived on campus in Professor’s Close with his mother and aunt. Neither accommodation overlooked a ‘crowded market’ though they were sited not far away. 

Smith’s road from his Glasgow professorship was certainly direct but lasted 10 years in all. I discuss the circumstances in my new book, ’An Authentic Account of Adam Smith’, Palgrave Macmillan, 2018 (blatent plug!).

Eva is an honest summariser but crams vast sweeps of history into short events. The ‘Industrial Revolution’ long postdated Adam Smith, who died in 1790. ‘Capitalism’ was unknown while Smith was alive - the word itself was first used in 1833 in an obscure English newspaper and much later in Thackery’s novel, The Newcomes.

Modern authors should be careful when back-projecting modern ideas onto much earlier events. Apart from these quibbles, Eva Schlunke’s article is timely datewise and appropriately welcome as a memorial to a major intellectual event in the history of poltical economy.

ANNOUNCEMENT

My rather complicated recent/current illness continues with new twists and turns. Currently the initial storm phase has passed (hopefully) and remedial help will improve my condition by starting soon.
Its a potentially serious blood disorder for which interventions are required.
The most obvious problem is one of maintaining attention to various projects plus my own writings.
Several projects are on my desk still awaiting my appropriate attention.
I hope the affected editors forgive me by inability to focus the appropriate level of attention they require and deserve.
Nobody is more disappointed than I am, I can assure readers and editors.
Hopefully this period may correct itself sooner rather than later.
Very best regards.
Gavin Kennedy