I have learned many new theories I have never known before, there are a great many
objectives and thoughts that I had never even knew existed before. Learning
about the history of anthropology has opened my mind of thinking in all these
different schools of thoughts. One thing that has shocked me is that I have
learned the early evolutionists had never done fieldwork, but would make
assumptions. The person that has shocked me the most is the theories Herbert
Spencer. He saw the different classes of the British Empire and he wanted to
know how to classify them, which is normal. He came up with a cellular
difference, the rich have intelligent cells and the poor have sex cells, this
seems ridiculous to me.
Spencer says the only thing that should matter to the
poor is survival of the fittest, why waste public money and health benefits on
them when they don't do anything.
Vitruvian Man by Leonardo da Vinci, Galleria dell'...
English: Studies of Embryos by Leonardo da Vinci (...
The Mona Lisa.The right way out of the poor to Spencer is
suicide. The things he says are so unbelievable, they have no truth, or any type
of evidence to back it, because of the fact that early evolutionist did no
fieldwork. The next thing that has surprised me is the progress that appears
after the enlightenment. Condorlet wrote mankind is perfectible and can progress
through the expression of genius. Malthus says Condorlet was wrong, he says
humanity will go down because of consumption, like food. These two theories seem
a little bit strange to me. Condorlet's theory makes sense, but what can he
say about the rest of the people? Not everyone can be a Leonardo Da Vinci.
Malthus worked out his theories with some type of mathematics, but his
conclusion are not likely to happen and we are living proof, so what type of...