tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post8207006193053813595..comments2024-03-28T21:56:51.675-04:00Comments on Face to Face: The entrepreneurial spirit and pastoralism, or how capitalism came from farmers and herders mixing their genesagnostichttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-28000508824299516472010-08-03T01:56:56.356-04:002010-08-03T01:56:56.356-04:00The ancient Hebrews were pastoralists, the Ashkena...The ancient Hebrews were pastoralists, the Ashkenazi worked as middlemen though. Derbyshire finds it odd that the story of Cain v. Abel sides with farmers against pastoralists though.TGGPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11017651009634767649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-53364456849520508472010-08-02T01:50:38.454-04:002010-08-02T01:50:38.454-04:00Re: Hamilton quote, sounds like he's talking a...Re: Hamilton quote, sounds like he's talking about the theory of Ibn Khaldun, popularized and expanded on in the U.S. by Peter Turchin, about nomads developing higher solidarity and thus being able to overwhelm the settled societies.<br /><br />Doesn't sound like he got at what differences between H-G vs. herder vs. farmer made the pastoralists more entrepreneurial... but it's Hamilton, so maybe it's there in one of his writings.<br /><br />Like I said, I'm not sure how original the idea is. If I turn out to have been scooped, it's better that it's by Hamilton than someone else.agnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-10784649148990403202010-08-01T00:48:00.133-04:002010-08-01T00:48:00.133-04:00Maybe there's something different to the Mongo...Maybe there's something different to the Mongolian environment that depresses their verbal IQ, relative to Han Chinese. Cultural bias seems a plausible explanation for the verbal section.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-71109686164122161702010-07-31T17:45:36.056-04:002010-07-31T17:45:36.056-04:00An important note about the Mongolian IQ -- they s...An important note about the Mongolian IQ -- they score 10 points below the Han on verbal IQ, and that's what seems to matter more for economic / business development.<br /><br />And the East Asians are already a bit below Europeans on verbal IQ (making up for it with a vastly higher spatial IQ), so I'd ballpark Mongolians as 12-15 points below Europeans in verbal IQ.<br /><br />That's the opposite of Ashkenazi Jews, who do a little worse than Europeans on spatial IQ but have a huge advantage on verbal IQ.agnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-52298962752395317532010-07-31T10:05:38.199-04:002010-07-31T10:05:38.199-04:00The IQ of Mongolian children was found to be appro...<i>The IQ of Mongolian children was found to be approximately 5 IQ points lower than that of Han Chinese children.</i><br /><br />Yeah, it looks like Mongolians have the same average IQ as the West European populations that gave rise to capitalist societies.<br /><br />Probably the last thing I'll say about this, but one thing I would question (though it's probably stretching the idea here to breaking point and seeing relationships where there aren't any) is how fishing communities might fit in. Looking at a world map, it seems like fishing might have a better correlation with capitalism than herding. Fishing is basically hunting and gathering, after all. Europe is a lot more coastal than East Asia, Japan is very coastal (it's an island) and very fishing dependent and the areas of China that have most capitalist success are also coastal.Mattnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-61155112095125140422010-07-30T16:38:35.661-04:002010-07-30T16:38:35.661-04:00W.D. Hamilton talked about this in his paper "...W.D. Hamilton talked about this in his paper "Innate Social Aptitudes of Man"<br /><br />http://lis.epfl.ch/~markus/References/Hamilton75.pdf<br /><br />"The incursions of barbaric pastoralists seem to do civilizations less harm in the long run than one might expect. Indeed, two dark ages and renaissances in Europe suggest a recurring pattern in which a renaissance follows an incursion by about 800 years. It may even be suggested that <b>certain genes or traditions of pastoralists revitalize the conquered people with an ingredient of progress which tends to die out in a large panmictic population</b> for the reasons already discussed. I have in mind <b>altruism itself, or the part of the altruism which is perhaps better described as self-sacrificial daring.</b> By the time of the renaissance it may be that the mixing of genes and cultures (or of cultures alone if these are the only vehicles, which I doubt) has continued long enough to bring the <b>old mercantile thoughtfulness and the infused daring</b> into conjunction in a few individuals who then find <b>courage for all kinds of inventive innovation against the resistance of established thought and practice.</b> Often, however, the <b>cost in fitness of such altruism and sublimated pugnacity to the individuals concerned is by no means metaphorical, and the benefits to fitness, such as they are, go to a mass of individuals whose genetic correlation with the innovator must be slight indeed. Thus civilization probably slowly reduces its altruism of all kinds, including the kinds needed for cultural creativity</b> (see also Eshel 1972)."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-49175965416513687612010-07-30T05:52:13.842-04:002010-07-30T05:52:13.842-04:00Lactase persistence obviously isn't the only t...Lactase persistence obviously isn't the only thing that matters for which group wins, but it's huge. The signature of genetic natural selection in Mongols was about 4 standard deviations above the average signature -- imagine a white American man who is 6'10" tall!agnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-40663486165359481252010-07-29T04:41:08.645-04:002010-07-29T04:41:08.645-04:00@Matt: Mongolians also have a pretty high IQ, at l...@Matt: <i>Mongolians also have a pretty high IQ, at least by European standards</i><br /><br />Some data for you, courtesy of Richard Lynn.<br /><br /><a href="http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=18770425" rel="nofollow">IQ of Mongolians</a><br /><br /><i>This paper summarizes the results of two studies of the intelligence of Mongolians. Both studies were published in Chinese in Chinese journals that are difficult or impossible for Western scholars to access and read. In both studies the IQ scores of Mongolian children were compared with those of Han Chinese children living in the same communities in Inner Mongolia and Xinjiang Province. The IQ of Mongolian children was found to be approximately 5 IQ points lower than that of Han Chinese children.</i><br /><br /><a href="http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=20552416" rel="nofollow">IQ and Mathematics Ability of Tibetans and Han Chinese</a><br /><br /><i>The intelligence and mathematical ability of Tibetan and Han Chinese junior and senior secondary school and college students in Tibet was assessed by a modified version of the Standard Progressive Matrices and a mathematics test. Among junior secondary school students, the Tibetans obtained a lower IQ than the Chinese by 12.6 IQ points, and also scored lower on mathematics. Tibetan senior secondary school students and college students also obtained lower IQs and lower scores on mathematics tests than the Chinese.</i>Joseph Dartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-18747668939127114312010-07-29T04:09:01.903-04:002010-07-29T04:09:01.903-04:00That seems like a stronger case than I thought you...That seems like a stronger case than I thought you'd have, but still, these people, East Asian steppe/pastoral peoples, <i>replaced</i> Indo-European pastoralist peoples like the Indo-Iranians and the Tocharians. So I'm skeptical that their way of doing things is much less efficient in terms of calories, and consequently that there would be as strong a selection pressure for lactase persistance among them. Lactase persistence doesn't seem to have helped any of the Indo-European peoples who they faced. It also seems like the people less suited (mentally or physically) to pastoralism shouldn't win their wars against other pastoral people who are more suited to pastoralism - though maybe that's a simplification as there's ample room for other factors in there or maybe winning large scale conflicts with other pastoralists isn't a sign of superior adaptation to pastoralism. <br /><br />I think the historical record certainly supports a younger date for pastoralism in East Asia relative to West Eurasia.Mattnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-64222760579178330512010-07-28T21:28:30.726-04:002010-07-28T21:28:30.726-04:00So, I think either Asian pastoralism hasn't de...So, I think either Asian pastoralism hasn't developed long enough to really adapt their minds to the way of life that we see in, say, European pastoralists, and/or there hasn't been much flow of pastoralist-adaptive genes into the Han.<br /><br />True I'm basing that on lactase persistance, but that's one of the strongest proxies for adaptation to pastoralism or having interbred with them and getting their advantageous genes. Give them a thousand or so years, and those Asian nomads will probably have as high a frequency of lactase persistance as Europeans do today.<br /><br />That may apply to other pastoralist traits -- on the way there, but not fully adapted just yet. So maybe it wouldn't matter too much if the Han interbred with the nomads -- there's not as much to get from them as, say, from European herder groups.<br /><br />Re: reducing capitalism to only two traits, I didn't say they were sufficient, but necessary. I noted all sorts of other necessary conditions that a society must have -- certain level of tech development and the rule of law. And nomads of Northern China don't seem to have those, not like Europeans did in the 18th C. anyway.<br /><br />As for Jews, I'm talking only about the Ashkenazim, who for many centuries were white collar professionals (then later a tiny amount of farmers). They could have kept some pastoralist genetic influence from their Near Eastern origins, but what molded them into who they are today is mostly their white collar niche in Medieval Europe.agnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-80796659964603862882010-07-28T21:21:19.816-04:002010-07-28T21:21:19.816-04:00Pastoralism probably hasn't existed as long in...Pastoralism probably hasn't existed as long in Northern China because lactase persistance is under selection there but is not like the 70-80-90% you see in Europe. But as of 1984, it was at 12% in Chinese Mongols, 24% in Chinese Kazaks, and 8% in the Han. Short article on this (Table 3):<br /><br /><a href="http://apjcn.nhri.org.tw/server/APJCN/Volume16/vol16.4/Finished/598-601Fu.pdf" rel="nofollow">Lactose and northern China</a><br /><br />This is a good proxy for history of pastoralism because it tracks the abrupt change in the diet as you go from hunting animals to keeping them alive for a lot longer. It appeared independently in Western Eurasia (possibly the Indo-European people who drove horses), the dester nomads of Arabia (who drove camels), and the pastoralists of East Africa (who drive cattle). And it appears to have also evolved in Central Asian herders.<br /><br />Here we look at genetic signatures of recent natural selection. The gene involved in lactase persistance, LCT, is under heavy selection in Europe and Central / South Asia (mostly the northwestern region of the Subcontinent), but not at all in East Asia -- except for Mongols:<br /><br /><a href="http://hgdp.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/glide.cgi?chr=chr2&start=136228288&end=136338328&cluster=pop&stat=xpehh" rel="nofollow">Global LCT selection</a><br /><br />The vertical axis is standard deviations, so anything that's 2 or above is a strong signal. Also not under selection in the Americas or Oceania. It's not under selection in the African grouped they studied, but they didn't include pastoralists I don't think, like the Maasai.agnostichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12967177967469961883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-81788634988981670212010-07-28T19:56:10.708-04:002010-07-28T19:56:10.708-04:00I don't think genetic exchange between steppe ...I don't think genetic exchange between steppe people and the Han Chinese ever really stopped. There are a lot more steppe dynasties than just the Mongols as all. <br /><br />Plus, is lactase persistance really a good proxy for pastoralism? Sedentary dairy farmers exist (unless I'm wrong and this is very new) and many steppe peoples who live off herds don't seem to have very high percentages of lactase persistence. <br /><br />Having said both of these things, you might still be right about relative scale.<br /><br />Mongolians also have a pretty high IQ, at least by European standards, so unless they lack future orientation (probably the best way to check this is to look at Mongolian savings rates - this link indicates it's pretty high: http://www.prosperity.com/country.aspx?id=MN), it seems like you can't reduce the rise of capitalism to those these two and pastoralist entrepreneurial spirit (since the Mongolians didn't have it).<br /><br />Also I wonder where East Asian swiddening hill peoples fit in all this. They're another group I'd expect to have more opportunity for accumulation and stratification than hunter gatherers, but less than settled intensive agriculturalists, but with more opportunity than the settled world to go from zero to hero by winning local struggles. Of course, they don't have any military advantage, so they'd be recipients of genes from the settled world, rather than donors.Mattnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-42706647082902657362010-07-28T15:39:47.784-04:002010-07-28T15:39:47.784-04:00something not to forget about asian society is tha...something not to forget about asian society is that entrepreneurial spirit was dampened by confucian social values. businessmen and merchants were considered one step above parasites in society b/c they <i>produced</i> nothing. they weren't scholars, peasant farmers (which was not then something to be looked down upon), or laborers. they simply transferred value from one group to the next.<br /><br />they were rich of course, but they didn't have their kids follow their footsteps. instead they often pushed their kids to become part of the scholar class.pzedhttp://undeadastronauts.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-28972816840924409042010-07-28T15:10:24.014-04:002010-07-28T15:10:24.014-04:00Is pastoralism low among Jews?
A lot of biblical ...Is pastoralism low among Jews?<br /><br />A lot of biblical figures were pastoral. David was a shepherd before king. Not that that is evidence, but maybe there is a strong pastoral culture inherent in Judaism that survives.Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04760976352941496561noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19346366.post-34570850754897618432010-07-28T09:55:43.939-04:002010-07-28T09:55:43.939-04:00But, China (especially Northern China) did have in...But, China (especially Northern China) <i>did</i> have intermixture between farmers and pastoralists --- precisely as a result of the Mongolian (Yuan Dynasty) invasion you mentioned, and the earlier Khitan (Liao Dynasty) wars too, and most recently the Qing Dynasty (also run by pastoralists, namely Manchus, who are distantly related to the famous reindeer-herding tribes of Siberia). The latter prohibited Chinese from settling in the homelands of the pastoralist Manchus or Mongolians, let alone intermarrying with them --- but those restrictions broke down in a huge way in the final days of the dynasty as they tried to bulk up the population in their borderlands to prevent them from being snatched away by Russia. In pretty much any Chinese city with a non-Chinese name (Ordos, Hulunbuir, Harbin, etc.) you'll find lots of people with farmer grandmas and pastoralist grandpas.<br /><br />These cities definitely aren't the centre of Chinese entrepreneurialism (to the extent that such a beast exists). This may simply be an overhang from communism (all the heavy state-owned industry was located in the North), but I doubt it. You can identify the most restless, entrepreneurial places in China mainly by looking at where all the emigrants came from --- Fujian and Guangzhou (to Southeast Asia and the US), Wenzhou (to Europe), and Shandong (to Korea and Japan). These are coastal places with little to no pastoralism in recent memory ...Joseph Dartnoreply@blogger.com