> Think of what processes and management was used for pyramid building

For what, a glorified tomb?

I fail to find anything in history that advanced the sciences or the arts through "collective effort of hundreds or thousands of humans". It's only for war or to consolidate power in the hands of the ruling class, never for the benefit of society at large.

▲

tetromino_ 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> It's only for war or to consolidate power in the hands of the ruling class

Consider Egyptian and Mesopotamian irrigation and flood management, Persian and Roman roads, Chinese canals...

▲

rglullis 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

What about them? These technologies already existed, the only thing that changed is that economies of scale enabled by the centralized power. Smaller tribes and villages could have gone by implementing more localized solutions.

▲

airstrike 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Roman aqueducts, modern railroads, the moon landing, the LOTR films, CERN, or Wikipedia...

This seems like an open-and-shut case of failing to look for disconfirming evidence.

▲

rglullis 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The moon landing is definitely a fruit of war efforts.

Wikipedia is the opposite of a top-down process.

Aqueducts and railroads: responded on a sibling comment.

LOTR films: I don't even know how it relates to the point, but it's funny that you bring a cultural landmark that it's an adaptation of the works of a single individual.

▲

airstrike an hour ago | parent [-]

You're moving goalposts. You literally said

> I fail to find anything in history that advanced the sciences or the arts through "collective effort of hundreds or thousands of humans".

> It's only for war or to consolidate power in the hands of the ruling class, never for the benefit of society at large.

I'm breaking it up into two statements because sufficient evidence has been provided to contradict the former, and some of your rebuttals did not align with the latter. Let's break those down:

> The moon landing is defintely a fruit of a war effort.

But is it only for war? Or did it "advance the sciences" + "for the benefit of society at large"?

> Wikipedia is the opposite of a top-down effort.

Your original statement didn't say it had to be a top-down effort. It's certainly "collective effort" + "not only for war" + "for the benefit of society at large".

> Aqueducts and railroads: responded on a sibling comment.

Scale and precision also matter and don't negate the fact that these are "something in history" + "collective effort" + "not only for war" + "for the benefit of society at large".

> LOTR films: I don't even know how it relates to the point, but it's funny that you cultural landmark that only worked because it's an adaptation of the works of a single individual.

I only picked LOTR films because they are notorious for being large scale and you never said it didn't have to be an adaptation. I could have picked The Simpsons, Star Wars, Breaking Bad, you name it.

	▲	rglullis an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> But is it only for war? No, but without it wouldn't come to existence. You can call it "moving the goal posts" if you want, my point is these efforts are not primarily motivated for the good of society and whatever advances we have are accidental, secondary effects. > Your original statement didn't say it had to be a top-down effort. I am responding to someone giving the example of the pyramids as something that could only be achieved due to "hierarchy, management and process", do I have to say it?

▲

echelon_musk 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the bosses ever done for us?