The Idiot Ancestor Theory

While this concept veers far more into metaphysical phenomena than any practical STEM domain, it happens to be held by so many otherwise-brilliant STEM workers that it merits a more targeted approach.

There is a basic set of values derived from scientism that represent the following philosophical framework of our present state of existence:

  1. Humanity came from the evolution from a less-complicated species.
  2. We understand the original cavemen as rather advanced apes, using rudimentary tools with limited skill to operate them.
  3. From that point, there have been millions of years of development, with the past few thousand years representing civilization as we understand it today.

This is what I call the Idiot Ancestor Theory: that humanity’s development is from a basis of inferiority, advancing upwards over time until this point.

This may be “common knowledge” for many in STEM, but it ends up presuming the following bias when taken as fact:

  1. Everyone that came before us is less evolved than we are, and their cultural values reflect that.
  2. Anything we can learn from history is inferior to anything we can think of ourselves with our advanced information and technology.
  3. Since we are changing toward something (potentially) superior, we must cast off the old ways that bogged us down.

The logical consequence of this will always represent as a type of leftward thinking, where liberal values are superior to conservative ones.

This simply isn’t true, though, proven by multiple examples:

  1. Ancient archaeological excavations demonstrate people back then were not stupid (e.g., Incan/Mayan temples, Giza pyramids, Stonehenge).
  2. A look at many historical contexts compared to modern-day equivalents (e.g., 19th-century penny dreadfuls versus FreeBooksy’s free horror books) demonstrates a distinct decay in the quality of what we create and consume.
  3. Given its presumptions and novelty, we shouldn’t see cultural Marxism radically depopulate humanity faster than any other political system has.
  4. Instead of an exploitative information harvesting vehicle, the tech industry should be a source of comfort and general transparency.

The only people who would continue ascribing to the Idiot Ancestor Theory have a secondary reason not associated with raw facts.

So, for the sake of perspective, let’s give a differing view:

  1. Humanity was created, not evolved, in a state not too dissimilar to what we recognize today.
  2. Our progenitors were on an equal level of intelligence, and probably greater in some ways because they had to invent things that we’ve learned passively from others.
  3. Our development may not be so clearly upward, with the possibility that we are morally decaying in proportion to our usage of tools and technology.

Naturally, this explains quite a lot of the above holes:

  1. Our ancestors made ancient structures, and probably knew some things that we have now forgotten or refuse to understand.
  2. As we gain information, we are developing more technical idiots and professional victims, which will be our eventual societal undoing.
  3. Cultural Marxism is a new type of moral cancer that has arisen in the face of the public becoming increasingly entitled and irrational toward people who promise to take over everything and give them stuff.
  4. Big Tech is doing exactly what any other group of morally unscrupulous people would do in their situation.

Historically, the Idiot Ancestor Theory rose more into prominence in the 19th century (in particular, during the Progressive Movement), and there should be enough evidence to dicate that it probably needs to be abandoned by now.