Primitivism Discussion

Skeptic said:
In fact, yes, since once you are a farmer territory means much more than it used to. It's not worth it, usually, as a hunter-gatherer, to fight over territory, since you can gather somewhere else and are nomadic anyway. But the territory where you planted your crops is a life and death issue for the farmer.
Click to expand...
Good point..

I wonder what level of weaponry or local constabulary, the Primitivists want to hold on to, to protect their stuff..
 
Belz... said:
You seem to not know a lot when it comes to the subject being discussed. Perhaps you should give it some thought.
Click to expand...


I may need to go back and re-read the OP to be certain, but I sorta had the impression that he started this thread with just that goal in mind.

There seem to be some other contributors to this thread who had a different impression, so perhaps I am mistaken.
 
Mr. Purple said:
(snip)
I think though, that much of the objection for many (not necessarily you Soapy) is misplaced fear. People are severely out of touch with nature, and I don't say this as a Starbucks-Eco-Warrior, I say it as someone who works at the human/natural world interface.

People are afraid of the natural world. To great extent this is manifest in many of our behaviors- Being drawn to "man vs. sharktopus" type programming, many approaches to hunting (conquering nature as it were), the disproportionate preoccupation with potentially dangerous creatures, and so on.

The thing is, it isn't really that bad out there. You are the big scary thing tromping through the forest.
Click to expand...

No, that's Granny Weatherwax!
I dare say you are right that many people are scared of the natural world, but it can't be the sole reason most folk don't want to return to 3000BC. (or even 1900AD).
In my own case, my misspent yoof was spent in a tent in places like British Columbia, Scotland, Iceland , New Zealand and the like- not true wilderness, but places where you needed to keep your wits about you , know your gear, your abilities and not screw up. But even that "20th century Spartan" existence relied on decent maps, a good tent, cosy sleeping bag and so on. I was on holiday. I was (mostly) dry, warm & comfy. I was , admittedly, occasionally hanging off cliffs by my fingers, toes and elbows (never a stylish climber, me)- but drop me in the same places with a stone axe and no shoes and how would I have fared?
Well, probably I'd have survived, because I'm sneaky and vicious when hungry, but it would not have been much fun -either for me, or the creatures I killed and the people I stole from. And that's the bottom line. This world can't support 7 billion humans on a hunter gatherer economy.
The first thing to go, after the bad bits of civilisation- the big pharmas and power companies and governments- would be the good bits of civilisation; equal rights for women and the disabled, tolerance, cooperation, science, hot baths.
No. Count me out thanks.

Which is not to say we couldn't do with less. We could.
Less people, for a start.
 
Skeptic said:
I wasn't implying hunter-gatherers are peaceful (they're most emphatically not). All I meant was that war as we know it today -- struggle over territory -- dates from the neolithic agricultural revolution.
Click to expand...

When I use the term war in these discussions, I'm actually referring to violence in general. How has that been: violence in general (adjusted for population size)? Has "civilization" been a positive, negative, or neutral influence in this?
 
Soapy Sam said:
No, that's Granny Weatherwax!
I dare say you are right that many people are scared of the natural world, but it can't be the sole reason most folk don't want to return to 3000BC. (or even 1900AD).
In my own case, my misspent yoof was spent in a tent in places like British Columbia, Scotland, Iceland , New Zealand and the like- not true wilderness, but places where you needed to keep your wits about you , know your gear, your abilities and not screw up. But even that "20th century Spartan" existence relied on decent maps, a good tent, cosy sleeping bag and so on. I was on holiday. I was (mostly) dry, warm & comfy. I was , admittedly, occasionally hanging off cliffs by my fingers, toes and elbows (never a stylish climber, me)- but drop me in the same places with a stone axe and no shoes and how would I have fared?
Well, probably I'd have survived, because I'm sneaky and vicious when hungry, but it would not have been much fun -either for me, or the creatures I killed and the people I stole from. And that's the bottom line. This world can't support 7 billion humans on a hunter gatherer economy.
The first thing to go, after the bad bits of civilisation- the big pharmas and power companies and governments- would be the good bits of civilisation; equal rights for women and the disabled, tolerance, cooperation, science, hot baths.
No. Count me out thanks.

Which is not to say we couldn't do with less. We could.
Less people, for a start.
Click to expand...

Indeed. As for that last bit, perhaps we should figure out how to make ourselves less horny. Some kind of horn inhibitor ... then maybe we would not breed so much. :)

We need some kind of middle ground. Hard "primitivism" seems to be a reactionary thing to the problems with excessive civilization. In other words: 1 extreme is bad, so go to the other... meh, no, it's time for some place somewhere between the two.
 
Last edited:
From what we know, Europe during WWII was practically blissful heaven, holocaust and all, compared to the number of violent deaths in most primitive tribes.

Typically, in the primitive world, everybody outside some small area -- ranging from one long hut to one small village -- is an "outsider" and thus fair game, which can be killed on sight and is expected to be able to kill you on sight first if he can.

The "noble savage" is a total myth.
 
quadraginta said:
I may need to go back and re-read the OP to be certain, but I sorta had the impression that he started this thread with just that goal in mind.

There seem to be some other contributors to this thread who had a different impression, so perhaps I am mistaken.
Click to expand...

Thank you for that.
 
Belz... said:
You seem to not know a lot when it comes to the subject being discussed. Perhaps you should give it some thought.
Click to expand...

Dude, I have no idea why you are trying to pick a fight with me. I started this thread so we could have a discussion.
 
Mr. Purple said:
Dude, I have no idea why you are trying to pick a fight with me. I started this thread so we could have a discussion.
Click to expand...

Who's picking a fight ? You keep saying you have no idea what you think. Clearly this thread didn't help you come to a conclusion and you didn't have a clue what you thought when you started it, either. I'm suggesting that you give it some more thought so you can answer the multiple posters who asked you to clarify what you think. How is that belligerent ?
 
KingMerv00 said:
I just turned 30. In most stone age cultures, I'd be rapidly approaching the end of my life. Kinda hard to support that.
Click to expand...

I hear ya brother, I am 34.

I was wrong above (somewhere back in the thread...). I offered that the life expectancy was reported to go up to "reasonable" levels (50's if I remember correctly) after one reached the age of 5. I have seen this from a reliable source, but can't recall where.

A quickie search just now turned up a Brown University study about Neolithic life expectancy. It directly contradicts this (and goes much further, my internet time is limited tonight, so I haven't read it thoroughly).

So, this definitely figures into my thinking. The question is still, what parts of modernity are beneficial, which parts of a primitive existence are beneficial and so forth.
 
Skeptic said:
From what we know, Europe during WWII was practically blissful heaven, holocaust and all, compared to the number of violent deaths in most primitive tribes.

Typically, in the primitive world, everybody outside some small area -- ranging from one long hut to one small village -- is an "outsider" and thus fair game, which can be killed on sight and is expected to be able to kill you on sight first if he can.

The "noble savage" is a total myth.
Click to expand...

I don't doubt any of this. But were we to revert to some version of a primitive lifestyle today, I envision it as the enlightened individuals that we are. Disagree?

(Setting aside for the time being how enlightened Joe Q. Public is or is not).
 
Review

Threads get long, so if you haven't read the entire thing, I am asking for discussion of the topic of Primitivism.

I am not advocating (anything, really) a strict primitive lifestyle. I have held that basic hygiene and medicine are prerequisites. The paradox that some of these things require modernity to produce them has been noted. With this, any form of my utopia that emerges from this will include some societal ability to produce penicillin and syringes. I am less sure about CAT scans, etc.

I am asking for thoughts on the matter. Specifically, what parts of modernity must/should be retained, and what are the most important parts of primitive lifestyles that should be incorporated.

I have also stated, and stand by, that there are different types of stresses that one would encounter in a HG society vs. a completely modern one. I do feel that when adjusted for medicine and hygiene, the stresses of a HG may in fact be preferable to those of modern life, at least for me.

Doubts about the habitat, or existence of Homo sapiens in their "natural habitat" ( ;) ) are not a concern of mine. I am comfortable with my conclusions on the subject. I am paid to know the flora/fauna of my local habitat, and I know it well.

I have likely not thought about all of the societal or social problems that may be faced. It is also likely that I haven't thought about some of the technological challenges. I would love to hear (more) thoughts on these subjects.

It has also been noted that a HG lifestyle is not in any way possible with the current population, so this is all hypothetical.
 
bikerdruid said:
the woods around my home are rich with medicinal herbs, barks and roots.
i have studied them and used them for 20 years.
i grow many more, and have a widely effective medicinal usage knowledge.
my ex, who lives across the farm, is a gifted and talented healer, of people and animals.
Click to expand...

All respectfully asked:

1) Do you have examples of shortcomings of your mentioned methods? Was there an ailment (whatever species) that you weren't able to treat? Were these treatable by "typical" medicine?

2) Can you provide just one or two tangible examples? I know of a few herbaceous species which do have bona fide medicinal properties, but am unaware of a vast assortment of them, as you seem to describe.

Thanks for contributing!
 
Belz... said:
Who's picking a fight ? You keep saying you have no idea what you think. Clearly this thread didn't help you come to a conclusion and you didn't have a clue what you thought when you started it, either. I'm suggesting that you give it some more thought so you can answer the multiple posters who asked you to clarify what you think. How is that belligerent ?
Click to expand...

My mistake, I will re-read your posts with a different intent in mind.
 
Mr. Purple said:
All respectfully asked:

1) Do you have examples of shortcomings of your mentioned methods? Was there an ailment (whatever species) that you weren't able to treat? Were these treatable by "typical" medicine?

2) Can you provide just one or two tangible examples? I know of a few herbaceous species which do have bona fide medicinal properties, but am unaware of a vast assortment of them, as you seem to describe.

Thanks for contributing!
Click to expand...

respectful questions....what a pleasant change....quite unusual, as you have seen.

certainly, there are problems that can not be fixed with local herbs.
however, the are herbs in the woods, or in my garden, that can treat a variety of ailments and conditions.

my ex makes a wonderful ointment out of the winter buds of balsam poplar and beeswax that is useful for many skin conditions.
yarrow, which grows very commonly, will staunch bleeding.
plantain is good for eye infections, and insect bites and stings.
feverfew for headaches and migrains.
motherwort for menstral difficulties.
st john's wort for depression and anxiety.
willow bark for anti inflammatory.
hawthorn berries for irregular heartbeat.

just to name a few.
there are dozens of others in the woods and several more in the garden.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom