The dawn of civilization

[The Grand Nudger]

Gae Bolga. These are just theories. And I tend to write too much, my bad.

I think I said something like "civilizations popping up". What I ment was they arose over thousands of years.

U are an expert on agriculture. But theres more to it don't u agree?
My theory is on pre agriculture as well and is based on observations in societies across the mammal world, human nature and war.
U didn’t touch on any of this.

Lets take it step by step. Its 7,500BC. End of the huge ice age. Life is scarce.
I speculate the Chad theory based on the fact it is the most seen mating strategy in mammals including primates.

The male is driven by survival first. Evolution has him hardwired to spread his seed far and wide especially in such a time where life is rare. There are no morals, just survive and procreate. His balls don’t stop. The testosterone drives his actions. He won’t “settle down” with one woman at this point in time. He will try impregnate as many women as possible.

The female on the other hand doesn’t have many seeds. She has to be choosy.
Her instincts are to find a fit man with good genes, a Chad. A provider and protector.

In modern days that’s a man with money. Hypergamy, it’s a fact.
9 out of 10 women marry a man who earns more than her.

So that’s what I think likely happened at this stage. Gae Bolga.
How do u think it might have happened?

Again for me there is no right or wrong answers here. None of us know.
There is no ridiculous. Its ridiculous to claim ridiculous. Hehehe. Seriously but...
You can posit aliens, sea monsters or even God at this point in time and I would accept it for what it is. Speculation.

You're still fielding a sprawling and ridiculous incel complaint rather than any theory on the origins of religion or civ.  That's why -I- called it the chad theory, the only name it would have in academia is "Garbage".  

This, due to the fact that chad theory is not only uninformative with respect to the development of civilization or religion in past..it's flatly untrue of human social and sexual interactions even in the present.   It doesn't even represent non-human primate behavior at the most basic level, lol. Trying to explain something like civ or religion by reference to Chads balls is idiotic, there's no way to step around that.

By 7500bce, human beings had been fully modern for at least 40k years. As far as explaining the rise of ag, necessary to the formation of civ...there is a line of evidence that points to reproductive strategy. For whatever reason (and the possible reasons are profligate) sedentary agriculturalists were more successful. This mirrors what we call an "amicability" strategy that actually is seen in primates, human and non human, in ways that chad theory just isn't. Chad doesn't actually succeed reproductively, friendly betas who share their bread have more children than chads by many orders of magnitude. Chad is the guy that's getting cucked, by a bunch of flower gardeners. So, tackling this one head on for what it is..not any explanation of ag or civ..maybe it's just you, not your beta status....most betas are widely successful....maybe you're just unfuckable, lol?

Now, back to religion, and specifically organized religion. It's hypothesized that organized religion provided benefits when it came to social cohesion and stability....but these solutions would have been searching for a problem at the onset of civ. This is probably why recognizable religious structure lagged behind both the advent of ag and the construction of the first agrarian settlements. People would have gone into that with their own individual sets of superstition...and it would take generations before any one of them (or any set in combination) rose to prominence as a defining pantheon. Even as a foundational conceit for central authority we have a lag. The earliest agrarian settlements had no need of a central authority, and there;'s no evidence that there was one...either. If locked neolithic social structures that persisted into the modern era are any indication..the heirarchal structure that colors and defines your assumptions simply wasn't true of those societies. Authority was distributed in a collaborative effort rather than concentrated into the hands of a single man or family. The age of kings..or, chads..if you prefer, is called the axial age, which began in the middle ancient period rather than in prehistory. This is when enterprising individuals found a way to direct and leverage the organizational abilties that human civilization had accrued over the last few thousand years since the neolithic revolution beyond the sphere of tribal or familial influence. When a plurality of superstitions and philosophies were winnowed down and filed under the overriding set. When deleterious wars of regional dominance began. In short, when the things that you take for granted as being true states of affairs on nearly every level... began.

There's a theory for that, too, that revolves around the exportation of violence. To make it a very short story...there's a point at which a settlements mass (in terms of population density) pretty much ensures a level of intra-settlement conflict that is unsustainable for the continued health of development of the same. This creates a problem. What do we do with all of that human "grrrr"? Well, we can engage in aggressive land clearing programs that extend the borders of our influence while washing out our various anxieties and violent tendencies against some outgroup, some other.......or, you know, sit around while our society eats itself. In the mass exportation of violence we then see a problem for which central authority is well suited. The organization of sustained conflict rather than sporadic raiding. The collection of taxes (likely in the form of food) and the logistics of storage and supply, as well as the production of weapons and soldiers..or the levying of otherwise idle agriculturalists and all of the pre-campaign planning that goes into the same. Beyond this strategic requirement, there's a tactical requirement of officers to direct forces, and so a need to produce this caste as well. This is very much distinct from an "honor war" of individual combatants looking for opportunities to increase their social status. Here again we can look to the late mississipian to see why such a structure flooded the landscape and overran other societies differently arranged.

Or, you know..Chads nuts and Stacy's hyper vj. 50/50