TECHNOLOGY AND CONSCIOUSNESS

Humanology 2 (2025)  [237–258]

 

AUTHOR(S) / AUTOR(I): Dragan Janković

Download Full Pdf   

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46793/HumanologyI-2.237J

ABSTRACT / SAŽETAK:

This paper examines the archaeological and anthropological significance of the Göbekli Tepe complex, whose emergence at the onset of the Holocene (ca. 9600 BCE) compels a profound re-evaluation of the standard narrative concerning the origins of monumental architecture and religious complexes. Contrary to the widespread assumption that such constructions become possible only with the rise of agriculture and permanent settlements, the case of Göbekli Tepe demonstrates that hunter- gatherer communities possessed advanced forms of social organization, technological knowledge, and symbolic thought. The arrangement of the “T-pillars,” together with their relief depictions of animals and abstract symbols, is interpreted as materialized mythopoesis—a religious complex serving to shape and consolidate the collective identity of a broader community. The paper further suggests a connection between climatic changes following the end of the Last Glacial Maximum, the transition from nomadic to more sedentary modes of life, and the emergence of a “surplus of free time” redirected toward collective architectural undertakings and ritual practices. Parallels with megalithic monuments such as Stonehenge, as well as with the development of Neolithic cultures in Europe— especially the Vinča culture as the apex of the European Neolithic—indicate that technological advancement has, from the very beginning, been inseparable from the value-laden choices of a community. Ultimately, the study challenges the stereotype of the “primitiveness” of the Stone Age and points out that a high level of social consciousness and communal responsibility preceded many later forms of civilizational development. It concludes that the contemporary imbalance between technological progress and social awareness calls for a critical re-examination of the motivations and consequences underlying our technological choices.

KEYWORDS / KLJUČNE REČI:

technology; myth and ritual; collective identity; social consciousness

REFERENCES / LITERATURA:

  1. Bodin, Milenko. 2024. Filozofija bezbednosti nasuprot ontološkom konstruktivizmu. Beograd: Centar za primenjenu filozofiju i društvena istraživanja.
  2. Dokins, Ričard. 2023. Sebični gen. Smederevo: Heliks. (Dawkins, Richard. The Selfish Gene.)
  3. Janković, Dragan. 2021. Vinča: neolitska metropola na Dunavu. Vodič kroz arheološko nalazište Belo Brdo – Vinča. Beograd: Muzej grada Beograda.
  4. Janković, Dragan. 2025.  “The  People  of  Vinča.”Humanology 1 (1). Belgrade. ISSN 3104-2570.
  5. Radivojević, Miljana. 2012. On the Origins of Metallurgy in Europe: Metal Production in the Vinča Culture. PhD diss., University College London.
  6. Richards, J. C. 1990. The Stonehenge Environs Project. London: English Heritage.
  7. Scheler, Max. 2007. Eseji iz fenomenološke antropologije. Beograd: Fedon.
  8. Schmidt, Klaus. 2009. “Göbekli Tepe. Eine Beschreibung der wichtigsten Befunde erstellt nach den Arbeiten der Grabungsteams der Jahre 1995–2007.” In Erste Tempel – Frühe Siedlungen. 12.000 Jahre Kunst und Kultur. Ausgrabungen und Forschungen zwischen Donau und Euphrat, edited by Klaus Schmidt, 187–233. Oldenburg.
  9. Srejović, Dragoslav. 1984. “Umetnost i religija.” In Vinča u praistoriji i srednjem veku. Beograd.
  10. Srejović, Dragoslav. 1994. Kulture mlađeg kamenog doba na tlu Srbije. In Istorija srpskog naroda I. Beograd: Srpska književna zadruga.
  11. Stanković, Svetozar. 1986. Žrtvenici i prosopomorfni poklopci iz Vinče. Beograd.
  12. Antonović, Dragana. 2003. Neolithic Ground Stone Industry in Serbia. Belgrade.