Yes - though that sounds suspiciously like progress.Belindi wrote: ↑June 10th, 2019, 3:47 am Sculptor1, regarding empirical knowledge, don't you think that scientific knowledge accumulates like as Hegel described thesis, antithesis, synthesis? the newer paradigm would not have been possible without the older paradigms? Isn't this a benefit of culture which is transmitted down the generations including when cultures were oral ones?
But I think maybe science is the one area of human activity were progression is inherent in the process.
It is, though, wise to always acknowledge that progress in understanding and knowledge does not always lead to progress in the cultural and social outside science.
It can be argued that Homeric epic was the result of a long tradition of oral transmission. What started as an account of a war and the journey home of one of the heroes, it transformed into a fantastic story with talking horses, witches, battling gods, strange creatures etc..
Oral herb lore was no different.
Oral transmission is poor without verification. And scientific verification is hard fought for.
Let's say that parent tells child about a herb that helps heal wounds. Next generation that child uses the herb but for other reasons the patient dies. Child no longer uses that herb. Knowledge lost.
Or parent uses herb B ,but patient survives for another reason that herb B. Parent continues to use useless herb B and tells child to do the same. Transmission of bad knowledge.
Without recording on paper or other media; without double blind testing, formal experiments all recorded, each generation has to learn from its own experience, which can be faulty.
When it comes to skills such as iron forging where the practical results are plain to see, oral transmission can be better than written, since there are some techniques you just have to do with your hands.