‘100,000 years ago, at least six human species
inhabited the earth. Today there is just one. Us. Homo sapiens.
How did our species succeed in the battle for
dominance? Why did our foraging ancestors come together to create cities and
kingdoms? How did we come to believe in gods, nations and human rights; to
trust money, books and laws; and to be enslaved by bureaucracy, timetables and
consumerism? And what will our world be like in the millennia to come?
In Sapiens, Dr Yuval Noah Harari spans the whole of
human history, from the very first humans to walk the earth to the radical –
and sometimes devastating – breakthroughs of the Cognitive, Agricultural and
Scientific Revolutions. Drawing on insights from biology, anthropology, palaeontology
and economics, he explores how the currents of history have shaped our human
societies, the animals and plants around us, and even our personalities. Have
we become happier as history has unfolded? Can we ever free our behaviour from
the heritage of our ancestors? And what, if anything, can we do to influence
the course of the centuries to come?
Bold, wide-ranging and provocative, Sapiens challenges
everything we thought we knew about being human: our thoughts, our actions, our
power ... and our future.’
Based on the
material I have read so far (Richard Dawkins in particular), the human species
is around 200,000 years old. However, we have very little data the history of
our species beyond 10,000 years (which is a very generous estimate). In this
book, Yuval Noah Harari, a historian and professor tries to explain the history
of our species – from the time homo
sapiens coexisted with other human species till the era as we know today.
The book is
split into four parts – the cognitive revolution, the agricultural revolution,
the unification of humankind, the scientific revolution and a conclusion with
the author’s insights into the future. Through these phases, the author
explores how the species evolved, how we learned to cooperate, and more
importantly, how they learnt to adapt to different conditions and scale up our
abilities without any significant modifications to the DNA structure. The
author challenges several traditionally held views – such as ‘agriculture being
the greatest invention of humanity’, how myths are essential for the survival
of the society as it is today (eg – for instance, we all believe that a piece
of paper printed by an authority has a value, the moment people stop
dissociating themselves with the myth, the society as of today would collapse),
inter alia.
Much as this is
a book discussing a scientific topic, the author has not used technical terms
and has written in simple language. I took a week to complete this book (with
most of my reading being during transits from home to work and vice versa) and
that is perhaps that’s a personal record for me when it comes to completing a
non-fiction work of this size (almost 500 pages). I liked the fact that the
author strictly maintained the sequence and at several points – regardless of
whether you’re a conservative or a liberal, religious or an atheist, the
validity of your firmly held convictions would be strongly challenged by the
author. It was interesting as to how I was initially shocked at some of the
statements but when we think of it deeply, it was true; and still we come to
the conclusion that these are very necessary inventions. I’d quote one such
instance which challenges some of my strong convictions on equality and human
rights
‘Advocates of quality and human rights may be outraged
by this line of reason. Their response is likely to be “we
know that people are not equal in biologically! But if we believe that we are
all equal in essence, it will enable us to create a stable and prosperous
society’. I have no argument with that. This is exactly what I mean by by “imagined
order”. We believe in a particular order not because it is objectively true,
but because believing in it enables us to cooperate effectively and forge a
better society.’
-
Page 123
With that said, there were also instances where I felt his arguments
were a little shallow, where he argues how a lot of principles we have today,
be it equality or respecting individual freedoms is a revamped version of
monotheist conventions (that all are equal before god) (page 258); which seems
an extreme conclusion to infer. This is arising from the idea that individuals
cannot arrive at the same idea independently; and it contradicts with one of
the very findings of the author’s – where he explained how different
communities developed similar agricultural societies without ever contacting
each other. Just to quote my own example, much as I hold strong views on equality,
I am an atheist and was neither raised nor been associated with any
monotheistic religion in anyway.
The other highlights of the book included how the author established
differences between humans and other animals – especially since the cognitive
revolution. He also makes the case as to how our ancestors were in peace with
nature to be a myth and in fact, what we have today is one of the best times in
the history of humankind (contradicting the ‘good old days of our ancestors’
argument).
I cannot comment on the technical aspects of the book and from what I
understand, most academicians do not have a very positive view on the book, but
as always, if you can either satisfy the scholars or the public at large but
impossible to satisfy all at once. On that note, I would award the book a
rating of eight on ten. It is a book that would make you think, and thus, one could say that the author's manner of narration is the greatest highlight of the book.
Rating – 8/10
Have a nice day,
Andy
Andy
Thank you Andy for this very good article. Always good to read you!
ReplyDelete