Feb 9, 2023·edited Feb 9, 2023Liked by Mike Sowden
There is so much here, and the idea of sonder with our ancestors (prehistoric and otherwise) is both beautiful and useful.
One of the first things I thought about as I read this, though, was the subconscious influence of old black-and-white photos (b&w photo = b&w life, right?). Just as people in the past were generally as intelligent as us, their world was also just as colorful. Now I'm wondering what other similar things are distorting my impressions of the past
Sonder is my new favorite word. Also “mapping the relationships between things” is such a perfect line for what you do here and what curiosity does for us in general. If we can’t see the relationships and connections between things, we’ve lost something for sure. Thanks for a wonderful read (and the shout out!)
Adding a "me too" to sonder -- just lovely. It always struck me odd, when reading about some new archaeological find, that a first explanation of a thing seems to immediately bend to the practical. Why were these pots violet? Well, maybe the violet color absorbs more sunlight, so when storing things outdoors it heats up slightly more than a yellow container...
Or, maybe, it just looked awesome, and violet was someone's favorite color? There's no doubt that many a thing are the way they are because of practical considerations, but I feel like not nearly enough consideration is given to the idea that these were full human beings who were also motivated by subjective passions.
I guess I'm a weirdo because I always figured people in the past we're probably way smarter than I am.
After all, they figured out how to start fires, tan skins, ferment wine, navigate by the stars, discover the concept of zero and then eventually all of maths, and on and on, all without the assistance of computers and so forth.
Meanwhile, I'm not sure I entirely grasp all sorts of mathematical concepts that have been explained to me, can barely navigate with a compass, and, well, you get the point.
I spent a year doing archaeology at University and it is indeed a vast and fascinating subject. I remember being knocked flat with astonishment when I turned up to do my first work experience dig in Bagshot Village in Surrey, only to discover myself in some fellows' back garden. I remember feeling very humbled that, right up until that point, my 19 year old self had believed archaeology was only carried out on high profile excavations. I do remember those trowels they had, but a personal triumph was that my mother (a keen gardener,) had the foresight to send me equipped with a kneeler, which to the chagrin of the other more erudite students on the dig, turned out to be quite a useful and enviable bit of kit.
Amazing write up as always, Mike! I have a book recommendation for you (in all your free time I’m sure). I don’t know if you have read it but Rutger Brennan in his book “Humankind: A Hopeful History” discusses the difference between Neanderthal brains and homo sapiens brains. It looks as if the Neanderthals had larger brains and therefore were likely more intelligent than Homo sapiens. Brennan argues that the reason that Homo Sapiens actually survived past the Neanderthals was due to our ability to imitate others and collaborate. It is a fantastic, uplifting book that discusses much more of the human condition in general and I highly recommend it. Your discussion reminded me of it - not only were past humans likely just as smart as we are, intelligence might not even be our best attribute as humans anyways!
Nice word, sonder, I always do it but never dig deep, it feels it could be overwhelming, all that thinking, and feeling and suffering and joyijng (🤔) from all those people all at once!
Another thought about dumb people in the past. On one side I see this also when I think of the seventies or eighties, how could we be so stupid? But I think it all boils down to how far our discoveries and knowledge got at any point in time. Obvious that my eponymous Leonardo Da Vinci would look like a moron if dropped in our times, but a moron he was not! And the same for any great thinker and normal person at any point in time. They just did not have the language and tools to express their clever mind.
This in turn makes me think, how far ahead could we go with our brains if only we knew the things we didn’t learn or discover yet?? This is another breathtaking thought for me, looking forward to it!!!
The idea of 'sonder' is perfect, tying in neatly with Buddhist beliefs of compassion and mindfulness which I'm reading about just now.
in addition, being a hist.fict writer and reader compels me to happily believe 100% positively in preceding generations through to the dawn of time. Wouldn't it be the bees' knees to be an archaeologist and find more and more concrete detail about the world's ancestors?
As a relatively new subscriber, I missed 'Kindness' and am off to read it right now.
Thanks, Mike, for another highly communicative newsletter.
Love this--it's such a pet peeve to me that people assume people from the past were somehow less-than. The whole round world of history could open up to people if they wouldn't insist on such a myopic perspective. Kudos for writing about it, putting that stonehenge song on loop now for the day in my mind (ha!), and citing the Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows which is just one of my favorites. Sonder. So perfect.
I laugh when I think of others pointing back in time at folks and believing that they were somehow capable of less (or are, yes, "dimwits")...when this same line of thought leads to future people pointing to us as dimwits, which is an idea I don't think the proponents are too fond of.
Thanks so much for writing such a lovely piece about this and for using vivid and interesting examples!
Had to read this three times just to absorb all the delightful ideas. I love the way you’re subtly eroding the whole concept of the “march of progress” that consciously or subconsciously underpins so much of the damage dominant cultures have caused in the last several hundred years, or longer. I’ve been reading more on the idea of “civilization” recently, and this belief in certain societies’ or eras’ superiority is clearly a source of tremendous harm. What could change if we collectively upended that belief?
Whew! You’ve got my wheels turning this morning, Mike, and I’ll be thinking about (and returning to this post) for several days.
“If we don’t understand a thing, we can conclude we’re missing something. But if we don’t understand someone, we tend to conclude they’re missing something.”
💥
What a statement!
And the word “sonder” is simply wonderful.
(Im also envious that you got to hang out with Brent & Michael in London...)
There is so much here, and the idea of sonder with our ancestors (prehistoric and otherwise) is both beautiful and useful.
One of the first things I thought about as I read this, though, was the subconscious influence of old black-and-white photos (b&w photo = b&w life, right?). Just as people in the past were generally as intelligent as us, their world was also just as colorful. Now I'm wondering what other similar things are distorting my impressions of the past
Sonder is my new favorite word. Also “mapping the relationships between things” is such a perfect line for what you do here and what curiosity does for us in general. If we can’t see the relationships and connections between things, we’ve lost something for sure. Thanks for a wonderful read (and the shout out!)
Adding a "me too" to sonder -- just lovely. It always struck me odd, when reading about some new archaeological find, that a first explanation of a thing seems to immediately bend to the practical. Why were these pots violet? Well, maybe the violet color absorbs more sunlight, so when storing things outdoors it heats up slightly more than a yellow container...
Or, maybe, it just looked awesome, and violet was someone's favorite color? There's no doubt that many a thing are the way they are because of practical considerations, but I feel like not nearly enough consideration is given to the idea that these were full human beings who were also motivated by subjective passions.
I guess I'm a weirdo because I always figured people in the past we're probably way smarter than I am.
After all, they figured out how to start fires, tan skins, ferment wine, navigate by the stars, discover the concept of zero and then eventually all of maths, and on and on, all without the assistance of computers and so forth.
Meanwhile, I'm not sure I entirely grasp all sorts of mathematical concepts that have been explained to me, can barely navigate with a compass, and, well, you get the point.
Also: Sonder. What a wonderful concept!
I spent a year doing archaeology at University and it is indeed a vast and fascinating subject. I remember being knocked flat with astonishment when I turned up to do my first work experience dig in Bagshot Village in Surrey, only to discover myself in some fellows' back garden. I remember feeling very humbled that, right up until that point, my 19 year old self had believed archaeology was only carried out on high profile excavations. I do remember those trowels they had, but a personal triumph was that my mother (a keen gardener,) had the foresight to send me equipped with a kneeler, which to the chagrin of the other more erudite students on the dig, turned out to be quite a useful and enviable bit of kit.
Amazing write up as always, Mike! I have a book recommendation for you (in all your free time I’m sure). I don’t know if you have read it but Rutger Brennan in his book “Humankind: A Hopeful History” discusses the difference between Neanderthal brains and homo sapiens brains. It looks as if the Neanderthals had larger brains and therefore were likely more intelligent than Homo sapiens. Brennan argues that the reason that Homo Sapiens actually survived past the Neanderthals was due to our ability to imitate others and collaborate. It is a fantastic, uplifting book that discusses much more of the human condition in general and I highly recommend it. Your discussion reminded me of it - not only were past humans likely just as smart as we are, intelligence might not even be our best attribute as humans anyways!
Nice word, sonder, I always do it but never dig deep, it feels it could be overwhelming, all that thinking, and feeling and suffering and joyijng (🤔) from all those people all at once!
Another thought about dumb people in the past. On one side I see this also when I think of the seventies or eighties, how could we be so stupid? But I think it all boils down to how far our discoveries and knowledge got at any point in time. Obvious that my eponymous Leonardo Da Vinci would look like a moron if dropped in our times, but a moron he was not! And the same for any great thinker and normal person at any point in time. They just did not have the language and tools to express their clever mind.
This in turn makes me think, how far ahead could we go with our brains if only we knew the things we didn’t learn or discover yet?? This is another breathtaking thought for me, looking forward to it!!!
One more thing -- are you sure you want to mention hanging out with these Brent and Michael fellows. I hear they are pretty shady... LOL
What a stellar article!
The idea of 'sonder' is perfect, tying in neatly with Buddhist beliefs of compassion and mindfulness which I'm reading about just now.
in addition, being a hist.fict writer and reader compels me to happily believe 100% positively in preceding generations through to the dawn of time. Wouldn't it be the bees' knees to be an archaeologist and find more and more concrete detail about the world's ancestors?
As a relatively new subscriber, I missed 'Kindness' and am off to read it right now.
Thanks, Mike, for another highly communicative newsletter.
Love this--it's such a pet peeve to me that people assume people from the past were somehow less-than. The whole round world of history could open up to people if they wouldn't insist on such a myopic perspective. Kudos for writing about it, putting that stonehenge song on loop now for the day in my mind (ha!), and citing the Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows which is just one of my favorites. Sonder. So perfect.
I laugh when I think of others pointing back in time at folks and believing that they were somehow capable of less (or are, yes, "dimwits")...when this same line of thought leads to future people pointing to us as dimwits, which is an idea I don't think the proponents are too fond of.
Thanks so much for writing such a lovely piece about this and for using vivid and interesting examples!
Had to read this three times just to absorb all the delightful ideas. I love the way you’re subtly eroding the whole concept of the “march of progress” that consciously or subconsciously underpins so much of the damage dominant cultures have caused in the last several hundred years, or longer. I’ve been reading more on the idea of “civilization” recently, and this belief in certain societies’ or eras’ superiority is clearly a source of tremendous harm. What could change if we collectively upended that belief?
Thanks for the shout-out!
Thank you for this word, sonder. What a rich, humbling, useful concept it illuminates!
Whew! You’ve got my wheels turning this morning, Mike, and I’ll be thinking about (and returning to this post) for several days.
“If we don’t understand a thing, we can conclude we’re missing something. But if we don’t understand someone, we tend to conclude they’re missing something.”
💥
What a statement!
And the word “sonder” is simply wonderful.
(Im also envious that you got to hang out with Brent & Michael in London...)
Very well done! Thanks!
Gorgeous read. Thank you!