>>7614916>>7614911So now seeing as this shitty from the beginning discussion devolved into even shittier dialogue on intelligence and development, I'll add something.
Development is an adaptation to environment and potential to make it is in every population (putting aside cultural, NOT genetic constraints, like for example religion).
Saying that if the society has higher mean intelligence will develop some innovation is plain false.
That's because most pre-modern cultures didn't care about innovation as much as we do now and neither had they enough knowledge of the natural world besides where they lived in.
For example if a culture lived on a desert, it didn't need to have agriculture. So they didn't.
Civilisations didn't start from scratch - they must have either spread from other places, or if there are none other places, they must begun in places where some of the concepts associated with civilisation, like agriculture, could develop.
And guess what?
Most of these regions (more precisely, Mesopotamia, Egypt (maybe), Nigeria, China, USA if you count the Mississipian culture as a civilisation, Peru and Mesoamerica) did actually develop civilisations, all independently from each another, with no contact, all starting from the same level of development: Mesolithic hunters-gatherers.
