The popularization of Ropp's logic is as important as the popularization of science, and I am the Bayesian of logic. People tend to hold two extreme views on the ancients. Some people regard the ancients as wise prophets, as difficult to explain as the construction of the pyramids and the worship of the god of fire. On the other hand, the ancients believed in superstition and ignorance, believing in gods, witchcraft, and dancing gods, which is contrary to modern scientific concepts. Today, we try to interpret this question from a logical point of view.
Whether the ancients were ignorant or not became the focus of discussion. Some people cite Descartes' logic as an example to prove the existence of God, arguing that this is the ignorance of the ancients. However, some disagree, suggesting that the ignorance of the ancients refers specifically to their belief in theology, metaphysics, and feudal superstition. Thus, a discussion began, and there was a heated debate about whether the ancients were ignorant or not.
The logic proposed by B is based on the premise that modern scientific research shows that modern humans first appeared more than 100,000 years ago and had the same IQ as modern humans. Although this premise is solid, why do modern people think that the ancients were ignorant?B explains that the ancients lacked more evidence and could only speculate on limited observations and experience. He used the early human cognition of astronomy as an example to show that the ancients put forward theories such as the theory of covering the sky based on limited evidence. B argues that it was because the ancients could not obtain more evidence that they came up with theological and other explanations. This explanation may seem unreasonable to modern people, but in the social context of the ancients, it met the needs of the society at that time.
B goes on to elaborate on his view that human beings work together as a team to survive and form society. It is easier to survive in large groups, and a shared belief strengthens social cohesion. He compares the differences between humans and gorilla groups, noting that the human imagination drives the formation of shared beliefs. These beliefs played an important role in ancient civilizations, such as the construction of the pyramids in Egypt. Although these may seem wasteful in modern eyes, they indirectly promote cooperation on a larger scale and promote social development.
From Bayes's point of view, B argues that the ancients were not ignorant, but that due to technical conditions, the ancients were able to grasp less evidence, so they made limited speculations under the limited evidence. He compared the IQ of the ancients to that of modern humans, emphasizing that what the ancients could do in the absence of more evidence was to speak on the basis of limited evidence.
A refutes this view, arguing that the evaluation of the ignorance of the ancients is from the perspective of modern people. The two disagreed on the definition of ignorance, which led to a debate over the definition. Eventually, they realized that the argument over ignorance, if it went deeper, would turn into a debate over definition.