Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Username: Password:
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6

Author Topic: Dealing with non-believers  (Read 16224 times)

jhereg

  • talks a lot
  • ******
  • Posts: 617
    • View Profile
Re: Dealing with non-believers
« Reply #30 on: March 02, 2008, 06:22:51 AM »

actually, you may to point her here: Fabulous Forager.

I don't think I see any reason why living "primitively" necessitates living in abject poverty, tho' I do think having "the best of both worlds", so to speak, will require a fair amount of creative and imaginative thinking....
Logged

Fenriswolfr

  • Guest
Re: Dealing with non-believers
« Reply #31 on: March 02, 2008, 10:16:35 AM »

I guess this goes along with the thread I just posted, we should do it anyway]http://www.rewild.info/conversations/index.php?topic=775.msg8623#msg8623]we should do it anyway (Help how do I post links wtf??)
points out that it's probably best to do this in a positive way

Quote
But this is a defensive position. It says we must do this or else. And as scary as the "or else" is, making change in defense is much different than doing it offensively; as a way to gain not as a hedge against ruin. Pat Meadows is responsible for popularizing "The Theory of Anyway," as an early response to those people who are calling for change "or else!" They were and are still right of course. If we don't change we are likely to experience more pain and suffering than need be, but that kind of a defensive motivator isn't always helpful. For one thing it tends to foster resentment. If we feel like we have to do something we're likely to cast about for someone to blame. Or we are likely to do it with a heavy heart and that doesn't promote success. That is, we are less likely to succeed in transforming our own lives and our society in general if we are moping about making change to ward off doom. Likewise we are less likely to experience resistance from ourselves, our family and friends and our community if we can frame the changes as positive in nature and not dreadful sacrifices we must make if we are going to survive!

Logged

jason

  • Administrator
  • chatty
  • *****
  • Posts: 381
    • View Profile
Re: Dealing with non-believers
« Reply #32 on: March 02, 2008, 01:18:24 PM »

A lot of people took my case about civilization's collapse in the Thirty Theses as a motivation for rewilding, and I don't particularly agree with that argument.  Rather, I offered the argument about civilization's collapse to show that rewilding has become possible.  In history, we find no shortage of failed attempts, to one extent or another, to break free of civilization.  They all failed.  Everyone dreams of rewilding at some point in their life, though nearly everyone ends up abandoning that dream when they realize that civilization makes that impossible.  The collapse of civilization means that rewilding becomes possible, it means that the failures of the past will not necessarily set the pattern for our own endeavors today.

You might call me biased as Giuli's husband, but I think what she's started to do with the Fabulous Forager cuts into one of the most important challenges to rewilding right now, exactly what Dan ran up against.  This marriage in the Western imagination of primitive life and asceticism represents a major misconception that we desperately need to correct.  Some people have questioned the use of, as they call it, "glamorizing" primitive life.  I object to the question itself; we don't "glamorize" primitive life, we simply answer the endemic disparaging of it.  Just like any other animal, humans in their natural condition enjoy lives of relative ease and comfort.  The kinds of hardships we endure only seem normal because we live with them constantly.  We shouldn't feel astounded by the evidence of primitive luxury; rather, we should take that as a reminder of just how pathological our lives have become.

So, to sum up my point: primitive living has nothing to do with Western images of asceticism, and we need to break that association.
Logged

incendiary_dan

  • Global Moderator
  • talks a lot
  • *****
  • Posts: 533
  • Non-violence never solved anything - C.M. Burns
    • View Profile
    • Twenty-Nine Thousand Acorns
Re: Dealing with non-believers
« Reply #33 on: March 03, 2008, 01:21:57 PM »

Right on, Jason, right on.

To add another anecdote that I think bears something in common with at least one other, I'll recount a short and annoying little interaction I had the other day.  Those who read my intro know the I'm in a polytheistic church that practices a sort of Pan-Indo-European religion.  I was at the weekly meeting for my grove (what we call our local congregations), and one of our prospective members asked why I don't eat grains, dairy, or processed sugar after I turned down free pastries.  I told her that I ate a paleo diet, and explained why to her, and she looked at me as if I had five heads.  I explained that humans weren't adapted to eat these things.  Now the annoying part?  She's a graduating anthropology major just like I am.  In theory, she should have a decent understanding of foraging cultures, even if she didn't take a specific course focused on them as I did.  I think this goes to show that even people who study something extensively can have huge cultural blind spots that make them miss obvious things.

Oh yea, and she's a vegetarian, so who the hel is she to think I have a weird diet?  Sure, vegetarianism is pretty standard these days (did it myself for 2 1/2 years), but it's definitely weirder than eating naturally.
Logged
Dan

Rewild New England - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rewildnewengland/
Twenty-Nine Thousand Acorns - http://29000acorns.blogspot.com/

BlueHeron

  • Global Moderator
  • talks a lot
  • *****
  • Posts: 848
  • Andy Goldsworthy, "Before the Mirror"
    • View Profile
Re: Dealing with non-believers
« Reply #34 on: March 03, 2008, 01:24:58 PM »

(Simulpost w/ Dan!)

Funny, I had an experience yesterday that ties into the bias that you all have mentioned.  I was telling a co-worker about the recent Skill Share at the Porcupine Palace.  I think the exact conversation was very close to this:

Me: "We did workshops on wilderness living skills.  You know, animal tracking, starting fire with a bow drill..."

Him: "Don't you mean wilderness survival skills?"

Me:  "No.  Living skills.  People in indigenous cultures don't really scrape by, tooth and nail.  They have ample leisure time."

Him: "Man, I could really go for more leisure time..."  (trailing off)

Me: "If you grow up in an indigenous culture, you'll have finely honed skills from the time you're a kid for living in nature.  It's only tough when you don't have those experiences and you're suddenly thrust into the wilderness.  But trust me, there's a lot to learn."

Him:  "I imagine so."

Our conversation switched topic after that.  I still don't think he believes that a "primitive" life can be as good (or, ahem, better) than a civilized one.  One conversation like that is not gonna convince a person of the bias in that assumption....
Logged
"The wonder of the world, the beauty and the power, the
shapes of things, their colors, lights and shade. These I
saw. Look ye also while life lasts."
- F. L. Jaques, artist

heyvictor

  • Guest
Re: Dealing with non-believers
« Reply #35 on: April 06, 2008, 11:42:19 AM »

While I am sympathetic to the sentiments that Jason is expressing here and for the most part I agree with where he is going with what he is saying, I'd like to bring up a couple of issues.

"In history, we find no shortage of failed attempts, to one extent or another, to break free of civilization.  They all failed."

I just don't think it's about success or failure. I think it's more about realizing that there is more than one way to live a life. I think it's more about values and a person can carry those values anywhere they go. 

I gave up on converting people a  long time ago. I just do what I do, some people think it's cool others think I'm an extremist nut who was a neglectful parent because I deliberately didn't have TV, playstations, electricity, indoor plumbing, etc. for my kids when they were growing up.

"Just like any other animal, humans in their natural condition enjoy lives of relative ease and comfort.  The kinds of hardships we endure only seem normal because we live with them constantly.  We shouldn't feel astounded by the evidence of primitive luxury; rather, we should take that as a reminder of just how pathological our lives have become."

I think the use of phrases like "ease and comfort" and words like "luxury" are problematic. A person has to already have a totally different value system and be very comfortable and solid in it to really feel like these words accurately describe the lifestyle we are talking about.

When dealing with the day to day requirements of a "primitive" lifestyle those words would be highly subjective. Ease and comfort compared to what? Luxury? compared to what? Looking through the lens of a typical modern N. American lifestyle that is a pretty hard sell.  The value system has got to change before that kind of language starts to look realistic.

There is a letting go process that must take place.  There is a Bible passage that talks about a person who holds on to the old, has no room for the new.  This same idea is repeated in many different forms and I believe it to be true.

In my life I have gone from a fairly mainstream (but very poor) upbringing, to a radical rejection of almost everything mainstream, now to a more compromising place.  I'm glad I went out to the edge and lived my ideals to the extreme putting it all to the test. I did that for quite a few years. A lot of people still consider us to be pretty way out there. I can bring the value system that took me to the extreme back with me and live this life with the solid foundation that those experiences gave me. When I meet people who feel trapped, who the mainstream isn't working for, I can say don't worry, that's just one way to live your life.  All that stuff you've been told growing up is only one way. That's only one idea of success. That's only one idea of prosperity.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2008, 01:39:11 PM by heyvictor »
Logged

jason

  • Administrator
  • chatty
  • *****
  • Posts: 381
    • View Profile
Re: Dealing with non-believers
« Reply #36 on: April 23, 2008, 05:53:04 PM »

First, I put off replying to this because I had no time.  Then, I put it off to gather my thoughts.  Then, I simply forgot about it.  So, this comes a little late, but....

Quote from: heyvictor
I just don't think it's about success or failure. I think it's more about realizing that there is more than one way to live a life. I think it's more about values and a person can carry those values anywhere they go. 

In some sense, yes.  But when you venture forth, saying, "I will go live primitively!" that statement carries a pretty clear fail/succeed proposition.  Many people have ventured forth saying that, and none have succeeded.  Sure, they expressed their values, and found things of great importance along the way, but as far as succeeding in fulfilling the claim they set out with, no, on that question they clearly failed.

Quote from: heyvictor
I think the use of phrases like "ease and comfort" and words like "luxury" are problematic. A person has to already have a totally different value system and be very comfortable and solid in it to really feel like these words accurately describe the lifestyle we are talking about.

I could hardly disagree more.  The idea that the ease, comfort and luxury of primitive living come from some branch of the enlightened mind unattached to the joys of this world--as Marshall Sahlins put it in "The Original Affluent Society," following "a Zen road to affluence"--springs at us as the misbegotten bastard from the ill-considered and troubled marriage of primitivism and asceticism.  Do you need to have a totally different value system to think that a longer life, a varied diet, feasting and partying with a regularity that only Paris Hilton could keep pace with, dressing always in furs and living entirely by actions that must of us undertake for recreation counts as luxurious?  Throughout our own civilization's history, we have called the class of people most able to emulate the lifestyle of hunter-gatherers elites, nobles and aristocrats.  Lescarbot first coined the term "noble savage" in 1609 when he noticed how the Mikmaq enjoyed luxuries restricted only to the nobility in Europe.  The lifestyle we talk about, as actually lived (as opposed to as portrayed in our popular imagination), involved preening over hair and clothes, eating a rich and varied diet, living longer and healthier, and yes, ultimately, a life of luxury.  It doesn't require any shift of values.  It doesn't take any "Zen" perspective to worldly goods.  Quite the opposite.

In both European and Chinese civilizations, asceticism has a long history as a kind of virtue, and though we may have our issues with the trappings of Western civilization, on the deeper levels--the ones that really matter most--we still keep our domestication near and dear to our hearts, including the value of asceticism.  That easily mixes with the Hobbesian image of life beyond civilization as "solitary, nasty, brutish and short."  Why else do so many primitivists and primitive skills enthusiasts talk about solitary "abo-treks," or running off into the woods alone, despite the centrality of social connectedness in all truly wild societies?  I've noticed a distinct vitriol in some of the response Giuli's gotten to the Fabulous Forager, and I strongly believe that it stems in no small part from this message threatening the masculinity of a lot of big, macho primitivists.  The connection of asceticism to primitivism makes primitive skills and their mechanical execution manly and hardcore, and by extension, validates their self-image in the domesticated template of the hard-bitten, rugged outdoorsman, all alone in the wilderness.  The suggestion that primitive living not only doesn't have to entail such hardship, but can actually mean a life of luxury, takes away the image of hardships that I think a lot of people use to validate themselves.

But that image comes from some deeply domesticated notions, indeed, from what we might even call the single most domesticated thing of all--the self-contained person, the Roman vir, the impenetrable penetrator.  The world as a collection of such objects, each defined by their characteristics, like "hard-bitten" and "rugged."

I have little interest in such things, myself.  I want to rewild, and that means learning from wild cultures, not from domesticated misconceptions of wild cultures.  Wild cultures describe themselves as living a luxurious life.  It doesn't take a shift in values to perceive it, it just takes dealing with the ways they actually live, rather than the ways we ascribe to them.  Hadza men would spend whole days gambling.  Some men never hunted at all, they just gambled and told stories.  Haudenosaunee men preened constantly over their luxurious hair and oiled their bodies, to an extent that would likely have gotten them called "dandies" in our society.  Hunter-gatherers eat rich diets; your average hunter-gatherer eats more kinds of food in a single day than even a wealthy American today will eat in his entire lifetime.  They wear furs, only use fine, hand-crafted tools, and want for nothing.  It doesn't take a shift in values to appreciate the luxury in that.

Quote from: heyvictor
When dealing with the day to day requirements of a "primitive" lifestyle those words would be highly subjective. Ease and comfort compared to what? Luxury? compared to what? Looking through the lens of a typical modern N. American lifestyle that is a pretty hard sell.  The value system has got to change before that kind of language starts to look realistic.

Ease and comfort compared to the way your average Westerner lives now.  Luxury compared to the same.  Most of us camp, fish or hunt as a recreational activity.  That constituted their only work, and only then when they felt like it.  A few hours of hunting or fishing compared to 8-10 hours in a cubicle.  Wearing genuine animal furs compared to button-down shirts and khakis.  Feasting and partying a few times a week compared to maybe going to the movies on Saturday if you're really well off.  Having the time for everyone to dote over their hair or the way they look, compared to just the pampered rich.  What part of this do you think makes a hard sell?  What part of this requires a change in value system to appreciate?

Quote from: heyvictor
All that stuff you've been told growing up is only one way. That's only one idea of success. That's only one idea of prosperity.

Sure, that remains as true in our society as in any other, but you've gotten a lot deeper than the level I meant to deal with.  On the most superficial level, without any reference to different values or perspectives, just from the conventional view of prosperity, hunting and gathering means a life of luxury, comfort and ease.
Logged

Willem

  • Administrator
  • talks a lot
  • *****
  • Posts: 838
    • View Profile
    • The College of Mythic Cartography
Re: Dealing with non-believers
« Reply #37 on: April 23, 2008, 06:16:35 PM »

I do think that a value difference exists, and I think most communes and other groups trying to "get away from it all" implode for a very important value differential-

privacy/anonymity vs. family/support.

Much like small towns, in our indigenous family-style living origins, people knew so much about you, they knew the color of your piss before it hit the ground. you have almost no privacy, unlike the absolute ECSTASY of anonymity we experience in the city. Imagine the Bushman famliy groups of the kalahari, so familiar with each other's tracks, nobody could steal or have affairs without EVERYONE knowing.

privacy vs. security

All the skills in native life, involve relating to each other, making decisions together, highly social give-support/get-support type stuff.

Although no one can deny the kinesthetic and gustatory rewards (ha! big words) of native life, few people (unless homeless) will cast their lot in with family and friends, sinking or swimming together.

We all know this, too, don't we? Otherwise we'd have a massive and noisy revival of rewilded small business and tribal organizations, making their living together.

People fear each other, in our culture, and they have the resources to make their urban hermitage work.

For now, of course.
Logged
the College of Mythic Cartography
every place a riddle, every riddle a poem, every poem a spirit, every spirit a place
http://www.mythic-cartography.org

jason

  • Administrator
  • chatty
  • *****
  • Posts: 381
    • View Profile
Re: Dealing with non-believers
« Reply #38 on: April 23, 2008, 06:37:43 PM »

Exactly.  My claims about luxury just point out them big words of yours, which I don't think a lot of people even know.  Once you understand that, the question of how emerges, and with it, the central problem of rewilding, the one that gets lost in discussions about primitive skills and what have you: those precious skills of how to relate.
Logged

BlueHeron

  • Global Moderator
  • talks a lot
  • *****
  • Posts: 848
  • Andy Goldsworthy, "Before the Mirror"
    • View Profile
Re: Dealing with non-believers
« Reply #39 on: April 23, 2008, 07:59:39 PM »

Much like small towns, in our indigenous family-style living origins, people knew so much about you, they knew the color of your piss before it hit the ground. you have almost no privacy, unlike the absolute ECSTASY of anonymity we experience in the city.

OH yes, very much like small towns!  In my childhood, I grew so accustomed to having everybody know my business that I kind of miss it, in the city.  I definitely don't like anonymity.  When I lived in a small town, I had an individual identity; everyone did.  When people saw me they knew me by name and they knew something of my personal history.  In the city, people know nothing of my personal details, and I know nothing of theirs, and this bothers me immensely.  (However, small towns still contain civilized problems such as social/economic stratification, non-animist religion, and expectations of conformity.  Not to mention domestic abuse, sexism, racism, and other very destructive prejudices.)

People in small towns share extremely cohesive sets of values.  I imagine that tribes work in a similar way.  But it seems that while small towns have prescriptive social values, hunter-gatherer tribes have permissive social values.  It makes sense if you think about it:  if you honor nature and permit it to exist on its own terms, then you can (actually, must) extend that permission to the people around you (after all, people belong in nature).

In tribes, these values enjoy an ongoing tradition.  And that makes sense, too: it seems crazy that anyone would question any kind of teaching that ensured them group acceptance and a freedom to explore/express their inner nature.  In fact I wonder if hunter-gatherers have to be "taught" permissive values at all.  If those values match people's behavior, then the values become an implicit part of culture, just like Billy was talking about -- a culture that you can only understand by living it.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2008, 08:01:28 PM by BlueHeron »
Logged
"The wonder of the world, the beauty and the power, the
shapes of things, their colors, lights and shade. These I
saw. Look ye also while life lasts."
- F. L. Jaques, artist

heyvictor

  • Guest
Re: Dealing with non-believers
« Reply #40 on: April 24, 2008, 08:27:30 AM »

I'd like to say first off that I am not a naysayer about rewilding.  I'm thrilled that this board exists and that all of you are here discussing the things that get discussed here.  I think the general direction that ya'll are moving is wonderful and I would like to be encouraging and say go for it, start living the life you dream of as soon as you are able, because it is a beautiful dream, not because you have no choice.

It seems that Jason and I are talking about different scenarios.  To me he is describing a vision of the future where the rewilding culture has evolved closer to it's full potential. I am thinking more of what the folks who are on this forum right now, and probably their children, are likely to experience in their lifetimes if they go for the dream.

"The idea that the ease, comfort and luxury of primitive living come from some branch of the enlightened mind unattached to the joys of this world--as Marshall Sahlins put it in "The Original Affluent Society," following "a Zen road to affluence"--springs at us as the misbegotten bastard from the ill-considered and troubled marriage of primitivism and asceticism."

I don't understand what that means. I haven't read that book. I don't know much about Zen. If I get what your saying, my point is not to hold onto mainstream values but just deny them. I'm saying, place your value on something different.

"...it just takes dealing with the ways they actually live, rather than the ways we ascribe to them.  Hadza men would spend whole days gambling.  Some men never hunted at all, they just gambled and told stories.  Haudenosaunee men preened constantly over their luxurious hair and oiled their bodies, to an extent that would likely have gotten them called "dandies" in our society.  Hunter-gatherers eat rich diets; your average hunter-gatherer eats more kinds of food in a single day than even a wealthy American today will eat in his entire lifetime.  They wear furs, only use fine, hand-crafted tools, and want for nothing.  It doesn't take a shift in values to appreciate the luxury in that....
Most of us camp, fish or hunt as a recreational activity.  That constituted their only work, and only then when they felt like it.  A few hours of hunting or fishing compared to 8-10 hours in a cubicle.  Wearing genuine animal furs compared to button-down shirts and khakis.  Feasting and partying a few times a week compared to maybe going to the movies on Saturday if you're really well off.  Having the time for everyone to dote over their hair or the way they look, compared to just the pampered rich.  What part of this do you think makes a hard sell?  What part of this requires a change in value system to appreciate?"


This sounds like a description of an evolved culture that could be down the road for our descendants. Not too likely for us or our own children, even with all the circumstances that we look for.  Actually I think this is really a description of the best of times for those "Old growth cultures" as you call them. Not typical day to day life.

I don't know you Jason. We've never met, never corresponded except for here, I've never even seen a picture of you, I'd walk right by you on the street. I have no idea what experience you have with the day to day reality of this kind of life.  From your comments about asceticism, I get the impression you feel like this applies to me.  I've lived outside the mainstream most of my adult life, back in the woods, without modern conveniences. But not alone, I have always had a family in this lifestyle(wife and kids) and also lived in communities of people doing the same things.  We have been part of work co-operatives with our communities and done community food gathering and preserving. I've probably come as close to living the life as anyone on this forum, and done it for decades, not months. I guess since I'm not still doing that exactly I would fall into what you describe as a failure. However I don't see it that way.

I could probably go through your qoute above sentence by sentence and provide another perspective, but I won't. Your comment about hunting for a few hours a day and only when they felt like it might be the case somewhere, but not most areas of N. America, except possibly the NW coast. Your description above doesn't talk about life outside. Most people would not think of walking, with all the possessions that their family needs, for a week or more to get to the next seasonal camp, in any kind of weather, as luxury. 
Most people would not consider going outside in the night at 30 below to squat over a hole to shit as luxury.
No matter how luxurious your fur bedding is, waking up in a dwelling with the air temp. below freezing and having every liquid in your house frozen solid since you went to bed last night would not be considered luxury even by most of the people on this forum.
Regardless of how well set up you are, there are times when you have to be outside, maybe all day, maybe for several days, even if it's pouring down rain for days at a time.  I know what this is like. I worked in the woods for 14 years. I know what it's like to spend all day, from first light until dark, on snowshoes, covering a lot of territory.  That's what running a trap line would entail, (for small game and those furs). And in that situation you might not be getting back home at night. You may be out for a couple of days. Not exactly luxurious by our contemporary standards. 

I've done a fair bit of research and study of the Native people of this area. I also am friends with people who are holders of oral history for those people. I've heard many of the stories. This area was probably one of the most idyllic places on this continent. Rivers full of salmon, every kind of big game, roots, berries, medicines, and a fairly mild climate.  It's still that way to a lesser degree.  I collect medicines for elders each year and some of the things that use to be more widely available are only found around here now.
The people here had a large territory. They were hunter gatherers. No cultivation of crops. Distances from one seasonal camp to another were long. And they did not always return to the same place each year. Often it might be two or three years before they returned to a camp. One year they might winter at the northern end of their territory and the next year it might be a winter camp 400 miles to the south.  They walked. Every couple of years some people might make the journey to the plains to hunt buffalo. This is hundreds of miles over the Rocky mountains from the Columbia Plateau. They walked, and would return the same year because wintering on the plains would be harsh and very dangerous for them being in another people's territory.

I'm not trying to discourage or be a naysayer. I just think that emphasizing this idea of a life of leisure, laying around telling stories and feasting while reclining on beds of furs is a fantasy that would set most people up for a rude awakening when confronted with the reality of every day life. 

Given all that I have said, I think this is a beautiful dream. I think this is possible. I think it's a desireable way to live with a family including children.  If you have ever read my posts about my kids you will see that even though they have chosen different paths, they have thrived and are grateful for growing up the way they did. Partly because of the values that they grew up with and the way those values translate into their life. I believe they may come back towards this life in the future.  Mainstream values do not translate so well into a rewilded life. Which is why I believe a fundamental value shift is required for a person to see a wild life as luxurious.   
« Last Edit: April 24, 2008, 09:16:13 AM by heyvictor »
Logged

jhereg

  • talks a lot
  • ******
  • Posts: 617
    • View Profile
Re: Dealing with non-believers
« Reply #41 on: April 24, 2008, 09:27:37 AM »

With all due respect to both you, Billy, and you, Jason, I suspect you're both speaking past one another.

Consider:
Quote from: Dastur Dr M N Dhalla "Homage Unto Ahura Mazda"
Poverty entails untold misery upon the earth. Life gives nothing at all to countless millions of children that are born and condemns them at the very moment of their birth to live in physical and moral wretchedness. They are born for sorrow and suffering. Life does not hold many happy days for them. The shadow of destitution hangs over their hovels. Fierce and remorseless is their struggle to win their daily bread. Starvation stares in their eyes. From sunrise to sunset they are on their legs for the merest pittance. Soaked in sweat, they toil and moil with their stooped shoulders and shrunken bodies. They have many more mouths to feed than the scanty food they have in the larder. They go to bed hungry on many more nights than filled. They lay on their beds of mattress or on bare floor at night. They snuggle together in a blanket, if they have one and whimper.

The poor in this world of plenty are in perpetual agony. Abject poverty mercilessly grinds down the masses. They have no wherewithal to lodge and clothe and feed and are without the barest means of sustaining life. The starving mothers could not give their breasts to their children. They slave all their lives, yet know not the joys of wholesome existence. The cold wind and frost of poverty withers them. Desperate is their plight and slowly do they starve to death. Condemned to live in the midst of dirt and filth and disease, they die of starvation and they die neglected. Famine and plague kill them like flies. Harrowing are the stories of the destitute. No wonder the poor everywhere are embittered against the whole world.

I think this passage is a reasonable description of "abject poverty", or what is typically implied by the phrase "living in squalor". Certainly, there's little luxury to be found here.

I think the crux of this issue is no more or less than lack of clarity on who gets to decide what constitutes "the good life". Jason seems to be looking at hunter-gathers and saying, "Yes, they live the good life, 'cause, they say they live the good life, and all the evidence (medical examinations not least among them) point towards them living the good life". Billy seems to be looking at our current culture/society and saying that our culture at large wouldn't in the least little bit consider the exact same lifestyle as "living the good life".

I think we can at least agree that hunter-gathers didn't lead lives as described in the above quote, and that's enough for me. I neither expect, nor want, everything served to me on a silver platter. I just want to take care of my family, and provide a good life for them.

Should anyone think I'm full of shit and oversimplifiying the disagreement, please, by all means say so....

btw, don't think for a minute that I don't get the incredible irony of the above quote's source....
Logged

heyvictor

  • Guest
Re: Dealing with non-believers
« Reply #42 on: April 24, 2008, 09:57:03 AM »

Yeah, You at least have summarized my point correctly. 

This thread is titled Dealing with non-believers.  I had a bit of a hard time with the use of "ease and comfort" and "luxury" in describing the life of wild cultures to "non-believers" and thought that given modern values it would be a hard sell.

But maybe you are correct and we are speaking past one another, I can see that.
Logged

Willem

  • Administrator
  • talks a lot
  • *****
  • Posts: 838
    • View Profile
    • The College of Mythic Cartography
Re: Dealing with non-believers
« Reply #43 on: April 24, 2008, 10:23:21 AM »

jhereg, billy, jason-

thanks for this back and forth. I hope you enjoy writing it as much as I enjoy reading it. I know sometimes the "speaking past each other" effect can create a bit of tension, but I love seeing the different perspectives and experiences interacting. Everyone seems to have important points that need saying.

and I LOVE hearing your stories Billy.

I really do.

Whatever the overall point of this thread, if it gets more of your satisfying stories out here, I consider it mission accomplished. :) Walking, wintertime, snowshoes, Rocky Mountains, hunting buffalo, trap lines. Awesome!



Logged
the College of Mythic Cartography
every place a riddle, every riddle a poem, every poem a spirit, every spirit a place
http://www.mythic-cartography.org

jhereg

  • talks a lot
  • ******
  • Posts: 617
    • View Profile
Re: Dealing with non-believers
« Reply #44 on: April 24, 2008, 11:13:59 AM »

Billy, that's fair.

Sometimes I get impatient when I see two (or more) people who essentially agree on a positive direction get tangled up in a disagreement that seems trivial to me.

I mean, given how I understand your argument and Jason's, it's not as if I could "choose" which one to be swayed by. I fully agree with both of you!

As to which tack is more likely to succeed in "converting" a "non-believer".... I dunno. I guess I figure they'll either decide to look into it or they won't....

Remnants of some bad experiences w/ evangelicals, I guess....

ps: I do agree w/ Willem; I find your stories very encouraging, and somedays I need all the encouragement I can find.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6