sentence-transformers/squad huggingface dataset:
Passage: According to the endurance running hypothesis, long-distance running as in persistence hunting, a method still practiced by some hunter-gatherer groups in modern times, was likely the driving evolutionary force leading to the evolution of certain human characteristics. This hypothesis does not necessarily contradict the scavenging hypothesis: both subsistence strategies could have been in use – sequentially, alternating or even simultaneously.

Question: What is long-distance running as a food hunting-gathering technique?

Question: What theory says that long-distance running drove the evolution of some human traits?

Question: Who still practices persistence hunting?

Question: Besides the endurance running hypothesis, what other theory of food collection is there?

Question: What food gathering techniques could have been used by early man at the same time?
Passage: Hunting and gathering was presumably the subsistence strategy employed by human societies beginning some 1.8 million years ago, by Homo erectus, and from its appearance some 0.2 million years ago by Homo sapiens. It remained the only mode of subsistence until the end of the Mesolithic period some 10,000 years ago, and after this was replaced only gradually with the spread of the Neolithic Revolution.

Question: When did human populations begin using hunting-gathering?

Question: What phase of human used subsistence strategies to find food?

Question: When did Homo sapiens begin using subsistence gathering?

Question: When did hunting-gathering begin to fade from use?

Question: What began replacing hunting-gathering at the end of the Mesolithic period?
Passage: Starting at the transition between the Middle to Upper Paleolithic period, some 80,000 to 70,000 years ago, some hunter-gatherers bands began to specialize, concentrating on hunting a smaller selection of (often larger) game and gathering a smaller selection of food. This specialization of work also involved creating specialized tools, like fishing nets and hooks and bone harpoons. The transition into the subsequent Neolithic period is chiefly defined by the unprecedented development of nascent agricultural practices. Agriculture originated and spread in several different areas including the Middle East, Asia, Mesoamerica, and the Andes beginning as early as 12,000 years ago.

Question: During what period did hunter-gatherers begin to focus food collection on a more limited range?

Question: How many years ago did hunting-gatherers start specializing in their collection practices?

Question: What was the change in gathering?

Question: When did the use of agriculture begin it's spread?
Passage: Forest gardening was also being used as a food production system in various parts of the world over this period. Forest gardens originated in prehistoric times along jungle-clad river banks and in the wet foothills of monsoon regions.[citation needed] In the gradual process of families improving their immediate environment, useful tree and vine species were identified, protected and improved, whilst undesirable species were eliminated. Eventually superior foreign species were selected and incorporated into the gardens.

Question: In what kind of area did forest gardening start?

Question: In what other types of areas did forest gardening show up?

Question: What kind of plant did these early gardeners seek out?

Question: What use did forest gardeners put to tree and vines to?

Question: What did these gardeners do about unwanted species?
Passage: Many groups continued their hunter-gatherer ways of life, although their numbers have continually declined, partly as a result of pressure from growing agricultural and pastoral communities. Many of them reside in the developing world, either in arid regions or tropical forests. Areas that were formerly available to hunter-gatherers were—and continue to be—encroached upon by the settlements of agriculturalists. In the resulting competition for land use, hunter-gatherer societies either adopted these practices or moved to other areas. In addition, Jared Diamond has blamed a decline in the availability of wild foods, particularly animal resources. In North and South America, for example, most large mammal species had gone extinct by the end of the Pleistocene—according to Diamond, because of overexploitation by humans, although the overkill hypothesis he advocates is strongly contested.[by whom?]

Question: Where do many modern day hunter-gatherers live?

Question: In what type of climate do hunter-gatherers live?

Question: What kind of human life-style is pushing hunter-gatherers out of their environment?

Question: What has Jared Diamond blamed the decline of gatherers on?

Question: What type of food animal went extict by the end of the Pleistocene era?
Passage: As the number and size of agricultural societies increased, they expanded into lands traditionally used by hunter-gatherers. This process of agriculture-driven expansion led to the development of the first forms of government in agricultural centers, such as the Fertile Crescent, Ancient India, Ancient China, Olmec, Sub-Saharan Africa and Norte Chico.

Question: Who expanded into the territory of hunter-gathers?

Question: What did the increase in agricultural areas produce?

Question: What were the Fertile Crescent and Ancient India ?

Question: What type of expansion was it in places like the Fertile Crescent?

Question: Why did agricultural societies push into hunter-gatherer areas?
Passage: As a result of the now near-universal human reliance upon agriculture, the few contemporary hunter-gatherer cultures usually live in areas unsuitable for agricultural use.

Question: What type of areas do modern hunter-gathers live in?

Question: How many modern hunter-gatherer cultures are there?

Question: What do people basically rely on now?

Question: Who lives in areas not usable for agriculture?

Question: What kind of food production is worldwide now?
Passage: Most hunter-gatherers are nomadic or semi-nomadic and live in temporary settlements. Mobile communities typically construct shelters using impermanent building materials, or they may use natural rock shelters, where they are available.

Question: What is the lifestyle of hunter-gatherers?

Question: What is the permanence of hunter-gatherer settlements?

Question: What kind of building materials do they use?

Question: What kind of natural structure do hunter-gatherers use?

Question: What is the movement ability of hunter-gathers?
Passage: Some hunter-gatherer cultures, such as the indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast, lived in particularly rich environments that allowed them to be sedentary or semi-sedentary.

Question: What kind of area allowed a more permanent settlement?

Question: What is the life style of the indigenous people of the Pacific Northwest?

Question: What does a lush environment allow hunter-gatherers to be?

Question: What kind of environment is the Pacific Northwest?

Question: What are the indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest?
Passage: Hunter-gatherers tend to have an egalitarian social ethos, although settled hunter-gatherers (for example, those inhabiting the Northwest Coast of North America) are an exception to this rule. Nearly all African hunter-gatherers are egalitarian, with women roughly as influential and powerful as men.

Question: What is the social style of hunter-gather societies?

Question: Where do people who are an exception to egalitarianism live?

Question: what group of hunter-gatherers are nearly all egalitarian?
Passage: The egalitarianism typical of human hunters and gatherers is never total, but is striking when viewed in an evolutionary context. One of humanity's two closest primate relatives, chimpanzees, are anything but egalitarian, forming themselves into hierarchies that are often dominated by an alpha male. So great is the contrast with human hunter-gatherers that it is widely argued by palaeoanthropologists that resistance to being dominated was a key factor driving the evolutionary emergence of human consciousness, language, kinship and social organization.

Question: How is it interesting to view hunter-gatherers' egalitarianism?

Question: What do chimpanzees act like as pertains to being egalitarianism?

Question: How do chimpanzees arrange themselves in a group setting?

Question: What is the dominate one in a chimpanzee group?
Passage: Anthropologists maintain that hunter/gatherers don't have permanent leaders; instead, the person taking the initiative at any one time depends on the task being performed. In addition to social and economic equality in hunter-gatherer societies, there is often, though not always, sexual parity as well. Hunter-gatherers are often grouped together based on kinship and band (or tribe) membership. Postmarital residence among hunter-gatherers tends to be matrilocal, at least initially. Young mothers can enjoy childcare support from their own mothers, who continue living nearby in the same camp. The systems of kinship and descent among human hunter-gatherers were relatively flexible, although there is evidence that early human kinship in general tended to be matrilineal.

Question: What permanent group representative do hunter-gatherers not have?

Question: Initiative within the group depends upon what factor?

Question: What group arrangement is usual in family authority?

Question: What is the kinship and decent system among hunter-gatherers?
Passage: It is easy for Western-educated scholars to fall into the trap of viewing hunter-gatherer social and sexual arrangements in the light of Western values.[editorializing] One common arrangement is the sexual division of labour, with women doing most of the gathering, while men concentrate on big game hunting. It might be imagined that this arrangement oppresses women, keeping them in the domestic sphere. However, according to some observers, hunter-gatherer women would not understand this interpretation. Since childcare is collective, with every baby having multiple mothers and male carers, the domestic sphere is not atomised or privatised but an empowering place to be.[citation needed] In all hunter-gatherer societies, women appreciate the meat brought back to camp by men. An illustrative account is Megan Biesele's study of the southern African Ju/'hoan, 'Women Like Meat'. Recent archaeological research suggests that the sexual division of labor was the fundamental organisational innovation that gave Homo sapiens the edge over the Neanderthals, allowing our ancestors to migrate from Africa and spread across the globe.

Question: What value system do Western scholars tend to use in analyzing societies?

Question: Who does most of the gathering in a hunter-gatherer society?

Question: What group members are the big game hunters?

Question: What does the argument over women as gathers said to produce ?

Question: How is childcare viewed in a hunter-gatherer society?
Passage: To this day, most hunter-gatherers have a symbolically structured sexual division of labour. However, it is true that in a small minority of cases, women hunt the same kind of quarry as men, sometimes doing so alongside men. The best-known example are the Aeta people of the Philippines. According to one study, "About 85% of Philippine Aeta women hunt, and they hunt the same quarry as men. Aeta women hunt in groups and with dogs, and have a 31% success rate as opposed to 17% for men. Their rates are even better when they combine forces with men: mixed hunting groups have a full 41% success rate among the Aeta." Among the Ju'/hoansi people of Namibia, women help men track down quarry. Women in the Australian Martu also primarily hunt small animals like lizards to feed their children and maintain relations with other women.

Question: How is labor often divided in these groups?

Question: What percentage of Aeta women hunt?

Question: What is the success rate of Aeta female hunters?

Question: What is the success rate for male Aeta hunters?
Passage: At the 1966 "Man the Hunter" conference, anthropologists Richard Borshay Lee and Irven DeVore suggested that egalitarianism was one of several central characteristics of nomadic hunting and gathering societies because mobility requires minimization of material possessions throughout a population. Therefore, no surplus of resources can be accumulated by any single member. Other characteristics Lee and DeVore proposed were flux in territorial boundaries as well as in demographic composition.

Question: At what conference did Richard Borshay speak?

Question: When was the Man the Hunter conference?

Question: Why is there a lessening of material possessions in hunting and gathering groups?

Question: What can decreased material possessions produce in a hunter-gatherer society?

Question: What other characteristic is variable for these groups?
Passage: At the same conference, Marshall Sahlins presented a paper entitled, "Notes on the Original Affluent Society", in which he challenged the popular view of hunter-gatherers lives as "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short," as Thomas Hobbes had put it in 1651. According to Sahlins, ethnographic data indicated that hunter-gatherers worked far fewer hours and enjoyed more leisure than typical members of industrial society, and they still ate well. Their "affluence" came from the idea that they were satisfied with very little in the material sense. Later, in 1996, Ross Sackett performed two distinct meta-analyses to empirically test Sahlin's view. The first of these studies looked at 102 time-allocation studies, and the second one analyzed 207 energy-expenditure studies. Sackett found that adults in foraging and horticultural societies work, on average, about 6.5 hours a day, where as people in agricultural and industrial societies work on average 8.8 hours a day.

Question: Who called hunter-gathers the original affluent society?

Question: When did Ross Sackett study time and energy for hunter-gartherer groups?

Question: How long a day do people in other societies work?
Passage: Mutual exchange and sharing of resources (i.e., meat gained from hunting) are important in the economic systems of hunter-gatherer societies. Therefore, these societies can be described as based on a "gift economy."

Question: What other characteristic of group behavior is needed in a hunter-gatherer society?

Question: What is the basis of a hunting an gathering economy?
Passage: Hunter-gatherer societies manifest significant variability, depending on climate zone/life zone, available technology and societal structure. Archaeologists examine hunter-gatherer tool kits to measure variability across different groups. Collard et al. (2005) found temperature to be the only statistically significant factor to impact hunter-gatherer tool kits. Using temperature as a proxy for risk, Collard et al.'s results suggest that environments with extreme temperatures pose a threat to hunter-gatherer systems significant enough to warrant increased variability of tools. These results support Torrence's (1989) theory that risk of failure is indeed the most important factor in determining the structure of hunter-gatherer toolkits.

Question: What is the only important factor in hunter-gatherer tool choices?

Question: What does climate produce in hunter-gatherer societies?

Question: What is the threat that extreme temperature causes in environment?

Question: What does temperature impact on tool kits?

Question: What is Torrence's 1989 theory about that ties into tool kit variability ?
Passage: One way to divide hunter-gatherer groups is by their return systems. James Woodburn uses the categories "immediate return" hunter-gatherers for egalitarian and "delayed return" for nonegalitarian. Immediate return foragers consume their food within a day or two after they procure it. Delayed return foragers store the surplus food (Kelly, 31).

Question: What does the immediate return system mean?

Question: To what kind of group does the delayed return system belong?

Question: Which group eats their acquired food in a day or two?
Passage: Hunting-gathering was the common human mode of subsistence throughout the Paleolithic, but the observation of current-day hunters and gatherers does not necessarily reflect Paleolithic societies; the hunter-gatherer cultures examined today have had much contact with modern civilization and do not represent "pristine" conditions found in uncontacted peoples.

Question: How do modern hunters and gathers differ from early ones?

Question: What type of conditions are not present in modern societies?

Question: Where do you find groups that represent pristine conditions?

Question: What do modern hunter-gatherers not reflect?
Passage: The transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture is not necessarily a one way process. It has been argued that hunting and gathering represents an adaptive strategy, which may still be exploited, if necessary, when environmental change causes extreme food stress for agriculturalists. In fact, it is sometimes difficult to draw a clear line between agricultural and hunter-gatherer societies, especially since the widespread adoption of agriculture and resulting cultural diffusion that has occurred in the last 10,000 years.[citation needed] This anthropological view has remained unchanged since the 1960s.[clarification needed][citation needed]

Question: What is hunting and gathering argued to be?

Question: What situation can cause food stresses that make hunting-gathering necessary?

Question: What change from hunting and gathering to agriculture is not easy to mark?

Question: Besides the use of agriculture, what other factor clouds the issue of the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture?

Question: How long has this cultural diffusion been happening?
Passage: In the early 1980s, a small but vocal segment of anthropologists and archaeologists attempted to demonstrate that contemporary groups usually identified as hunter-gatherers do not, in most cases, have a continuous history of hunting and gathering, and that in many cases their ancestors were agriculturalists and/or pastoralists[citation needed] who were pushed into marginal areas as a result of migrations, economic exploitation, and/or violent conflict (see, for example, the Kalahari Debate). The result of their effort has been the general acknowledgement that there has been complex interaction between hunter-gatherers and non-hunter-gatherers for millennia.[citation needed]

Question: If they're not purely hunter-gatherers, then what do they have a history of being?

Question: What caused these one-time agriculturalists to become foragers??

Question: What kind of upset could force agriculturalists into being foragers?

Question: Besides economic troubles, what else could push a people into foraging?
Passage: Some of the theorists who advocate this "revisionist" critique imply that, because the "pure hunter-gatherer" disappeared not long after colonial (or even agricultural) contact began, nothing meaningful can be learned about prehistoric hunter-gatherers from studies of modern ones (Kelly, 24-29; see Wilmsen)

Question: What can be learned from the study of modern hunter-gatherers?

Question: Who thinks that it is useless to study modern foragers since the real ones are gone?

Question: What type of hunter-gatherer has disappeared ?
Passage: Lee and Guenther have rejected most of the arguments put forward by Wilmsen. Doron Shultziner and others have argued that we can learn a lot about the life-styles of prehistoric hunter-gatherers from studies of contemporary hunter-gatherers—especially their impressive levels of egalitarianism.

Question: Who has rejected Wilmsen's arguments?

Question: Whose lifestyle does Shultziner think we can learn about?

Question: What is it about prehistoric hunter-gatherers that impresses Shultziner?

Question: Who has offered arguments that Lee and Guenther disliked?
Passage: Many hunter-gatherers consciously manipulate the landscape through cutting or burning undesirable plants while encouraging desirable ones, some even going to the extent of slash-and-burn to create habitat for game animals. These activities are on an entirely different scale to those associated with agriculture, but they are nevertheless domestication on some level. Today, almost all hunter-gatherers depend to some extent upon domesticated food sources either produced part-time or traded for products acquired in the wild.

Question: What do hunter-gathers intentionally manipulate?

Question: How do they manage the landscape?

Question: What technique do they use to make animal habitats?

Question: What is the manipulation of the landscape associated with?

Question: What do modern hunter-gatherers depend on at least somewhat?
Passage: Some agriculturalists also regularly hunt and gather (e.g., farming during the frost-free season and hunting during the winter). Still others in developed countries go hunting, primarily for leisure. In the Brazilian rainforest, those groups that recently did, or even continue to, rely on hunting and gathering techniques seem to have adopted this lifestyle, abandoning most agriculture, as a way to escape colonial control and as a result of the introduction of European diseases reducing their populations to levels where agriculture became difficult.[citation needed][dubious – discuss]

Question: What do some agriculturalists often do?

Question: What do they sometimes do for entertainment?

Question: Why would they leave agricultural lifestyle?

Question: Besides avoiding government controls, what other reason could they have?
Passage: There are nevertheless a number of contemporary hunter-gatherer peoples who, after contact with other societies, continue their ways of life with very little external influence. One such group is the Pila Nguru (Spinifex people) of Western Australia, whose habitat in the Great Victoria Desert has proved unsuitable for European agriculture (and even pastoralism).[citation needed] Another are the Sentinelese of the Andaman Islands in the Indian Ocean, who live on North Sentinel Island and to date have maintained their independent existence, repelling attempts to engage with and contact them.[citation needed]

Question: What is the name of the Spinifex people?

Question: Where do the Pila Nguru people live?

Question: Who refuses contact with outsiders on Sentinel Island?

Question: Where are the Sentinelese and the Andaman Islands?
Passage: Evidence suggests big-game hunter gatherers crossed the Bering Strait from Asia (Eurasia) into North America over a land bridge (Beringia), that existed between 47,000–14,000 years ago. Around 18,500-15,500 years ago, these hunter-gatherers are believed to have followed herds of now-extinct Pleistocene megafauna along ice-free corridors that stretched between the Laurentide and Cordilleran ice sheets. Another route proposed is that, either on foot or using primitive boats, they migrated down the Pacific coast to South America.

Question: These ancient hunter-gathers followed what path in pursuit of game?

Question: Between what ice sheets were the corridors located?

Question: What other way could they have crossed on to this continent?
Passage: Hunter-gatherers would eventually flourish all over the Americas, primarily based in the Great Plains of the United States and Canada, with offshoots as far east as the Gaspé Peninsula on the Atlantic coast, and as far south as Chile, Monte Verde.[citation needed] American hunter-gatherers were spread over a wide geographical area, thus there were regional variations in lifestyles. However, all the individual groups shared a common style of stone tool production, making knapping styles and progress identifiable. This early Paleo-Indian period lithic reduction tool adaptations have been found across the Americas, utilized by highly mobile bands consisting of approximately 25 to 50 members of an extended family.

Question: Where did the North American hunter-gathers mostly live?

Question: What basic trait do all hunter-gatherers share?

Question: What is it about the tool styles that is remarkable?

Question: Where have early Paleo -Indian tools been found?

Question: How many members did the mobile tool-making hunters often have?