Anyone want to read and discuss "The Origin of Consc in the Breakdown of the B Mind ?

[Whateverist]

I read this book nearly 30 years ago and at the time did not find it compelling. I felt he relied on too few data points to justify his sweeping generalizations. Only scraps of written narratives from the ancient world have survived. As I recall he based much of his theory on the style of the Homeric epics. Imagine what a future society would think of our mental states if the only surviving text was A Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy!

I question the idea that IQ's are rising. Why do we, and I include myself as well, tend to assume that our societal structures, our ways of thinking, and preferred ways of making sense of life are the pinnacle of human consciousness? That seems rather chauvinistic like the Victorian Imperialists feeling superior to those beastly Savages. I do not doubt that we probably live in the most technologically advanced culture yet. There is no evidence to say otherwise. At the same time, 200,000 years is quite a long time, and just a few catastrophic events can wipe out significant progress. Consider for how much intellectual history must have disappeared with a single fire at the Alexandrian Library! Now factor in the Ice Age and all the once habitual land masses in the South Pacific. Our presumably 6,000 year rise to power could have been one of several such eras of advanced civilization. Personally I find it incredible that homo sapiens, people just like you and me, did nothing to better themselves for 194,000 years then inexplicably exploded into action. Recent discovery of the 10,000 year old ruins at Gobekli Tepe call into question the previous timeline.

Based on the above, I do not take much stock in highly speculative pronouncements about human consciousness when we know so very little about the overwhelming majority of our history.

Sounds as though you, like Dawkins, are aghast at how speculative must be any attempts to theorize about the origins of consciousness.  - Can't help feeling some satisfaction in shipping you with Dawkins here.  

Like Dennett, with whom I more often disagree than agree, I think you who "have no taste for this sort of speculative enterprise will just have to stay in the trenches and do without it, while the rest of us risk embarrassing mistakes and have a lot of fun."  - Believe me I am just as dismayed to be shipped with Dennett as you must be to be agreeing with Dawkins.