Chapter 1: The Diverging Paths of Thought

Recently, I began delving into Yuval Harari's Sapiens, which presents a more somber and pessimistic perspective on the origins and nature of humanity compared to The Dawn of Everything by David Graeber and David Wengrow. While both works candidly acknowledge the speculative nature of their discussions regarding the vast unknowns of prehistory, they aim to maintain a scientifically objective and balanced approach in their exploration of anthropological and archaeological evidence. However, even after only a fifth of the way through Harari’s narrative, it's evident that his ideological and ethical stance significantly influences his interpretation, often more so than the scientific evidence he cites. The same observation holds true for G&W’s work.

When comparing the overall tone of the two texts, the differences are as pronounced as those between the films of Steven Spielberg and Roman Polanski, or between the animated charm of Pixar and the gritty storytelling of Sam Peckinpah. Both authors draw from similar sources yet present almost opposing interpretations, making it somewhat absurd to assert that one book is more scientifically accurate than the other. Both works are colored by personal biases, interpretations, and agendas, reminiscent of the contrasting philosophies of Hobbes and Rousseau regarding humanity's nature.

Thus, my preference for The Dawn of Everything over Sapiens might simply reflect my emotional response to the narratives presented, akin to enjoying Spielberg's films for their uplifting qualities while being less fond of David Lynch’s work—except for a couple of exceptions, such as The Straight Story and The Elephant Man. This raises the question: if I appreciate both directors’ styles, does it indicate a contradiction or complexity in my preferences?

Section 1.1: The Spectrum of Human Nature

It is crucial to keep in mind that the debates surrounding "human nature" and the "origins" of our species evoke strong emotions and are often contentious. Humans, as a collective, display a vast range of characteristics, with Hobbesian and Rousseauian types at either end of the spectrum. Individuals may oscillate between these extremes at different times, while many remain somewhere in the middle, adopting a more neutral stance.

Subsection 1.1.1: The Storytellers Behind the Science

I don’t wish to imply a strict division between "hard" science, which is deemed reliable, and "soft" narratives that are more entertaining yet can be misleading. Both Harari and G&W ultimately serve as narrators and creators of myths. To overlook the narrative aspect of their works is to fall into the pitfalls of scientism, dogmatism, and literal interpretation, or, conversely, to embrace relativism and nihilism. In the absence of clear scientific knowledge, storytelling emerges to fill the gaps, much like our unconscious biases and unexamined beliefs shape our personal worldviews. Is it true that the psyche cannot tolerate a void, always ready to fill in the gaps of our understanding?

Chapter 2: Navigating the Myths of Human Origins

As we navigate these complex narratives, it’s essential to remain aware of the biases that influence our interpretations and the broader implications of these stories on our understanding of human nature and history.