Gaming World Forums

General Category => General Talk => Topic started by: Doktormartini on March 31, 2008, 04:58:13 am

Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Doktormartini on March 31, 2008, 04:58:13 am
I'm not here to argue for or against or anything I'm just curious what your thoughts are :) thanks!



I just finished reading the book called Ishmael together with it is amazing! It changed my view of the world lol.

The book is pretty much about in what manner or way civilized humans are screwing up the world. Basically a man talks to a gorilla named Ishmael, who tells him the problems of the world. He says the problem started with the Agricultural Revolution (about 10,000 years ago) when man learned in what manner or way to produce his own food extensively. From then on man wanted to basically go "bigger together with bigger" kind of like going against what the gods had in mind.

Anyways it covers a number of topics. It compares civilized man with primitive man together with animals. There is an exceptionally good discussion on world hunger. The books says the only way to stop world hunger is to stop producing food. He compares it with animals. When animals have enough food, they eat. When the food population goes down, so does the animal population until it levels out...food rises, animal population rises. For us, when we increase food, the population increases. It mentions in what manner or way when you increase food to feed the starving people, their population increases so basically more people are then born into the life of poverty together with so thus we produce even more food together with it goes up together with up. Basically humans are populated...it’s like this. Humans live on every continent in the world (except Antartica contrary to expectation we’ve been there lol) together with in lots of spaces...whereas take a gorilla for example, they live in a small area of central Africa, that is it. The premise of the book is that if man stayed a hunter-gather together with not became civilized, we wouldn’t have any of the problems we face today. Animals take what they need together with leave the rest for others, animals don’t store food for long periods of time, animals don’t grow there own food, animals don’t kill for pleasure...etc all things civilized humans do :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishmael_(novel)


What are your thoughts?
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: im9today on March 31, 2008, 05:06:53 am
Mostly amazement that anyone could actually believe this.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Ghost_Aspergers on March 31, 2008, 05:12:36 am
I thought this was going to be another topic about religion... seeing as how the fad these days is to call religious people primitive~
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Maximo on March 31, 2008, 05:12:55 am
I don't quite understand how if food production increases, so do the number of people in poverty. Kind of an oxymoron. More people would have jobs growing/preparing food from this...
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: crone_lover720 on March 31, 2008, 05:15:24 am
zzz dok seriously now.

humans are a lot more complex than other animals, that is why we are here today

gorillas would live all over the entire planet if it were possible for them to. every living thing tries to survive and reproduce.

you're right: when animals in the wild run out of food, they starve and die.

Quote
Animals take what they need and leave the rest for others
animals take what they need and don't give a shit about anyone else. there is no magical fucking code of empathy in the animal kindom dude. this PRIMITIVE FANTASY of yours is like some huge source of escapism for you

Quote from: dok I saved this
humans are different from animals
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: ghastly_darklord on March 31, 2008, 05:17:43 am
I thought this was going to be another topic about religion... seeing as how the fad these days is to call religious people primitive~
they are.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Cho on March 31, 2008, 05:22:06 am
Quote
we wouldn’t have any of the problems we face today.

Disease and natural disasters do not affect gorillas. 
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Doktormartini on March 31, 2008, 05:22:58 am
I don't quite understand how if food production increases, so do the number of people in poverty. Kind of an oxymoron. More people would have jobs growing/preparing food from this...

Quote from: The
You need to take a step back from the problem in order to see it in a global perspective. At present there are five and a half billion of you here, and, though millions of you are starving, you're producing enough food to feed six billion. And because you're producing enough food for six billion, it's a biological certainty that in three or four years there will be six billion of you. By that time, however (even though millions of you will still be starving), you'll be producing enough food for six and a half billion-which means that in another three or four years there will be six and a half billion. but by that time you'll be producing enough food for seven billion (even though millions of you will still be starving), which again means that in another three or four years there will be seven billion of you. In order to halt this process, you must face the fact that increasing food production doesn't feed your hungry, it only fuels your population explosion.
Dunno how true this is.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Hundley on March 31, 2008, 05:26:01 am
FACT OR FICTION: The only true pathway into heaven is through the furry lifestyle.

A: FACT. IF youf gnaw on you genital every day...[read more] (http://home.no/misterinternet/2tonyapril1.jpg)
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Blitzen on March 31, 2008, 05:27:03 am
My thoughts on this: we don't like to let other humans starve to death. People are hungry because they are not eating when they should be, not because there is too much food creating too many people. In fact, in the most developed countires birth rates have actually started descending, showing that eventually industrialization will level off and prevent overpopulation. Its povery that makes people hungry (ie living closer to primitivism) moreso than civilization. Global food output and localized reasons for povery aren't exactly correlated.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: something bizarre and impractical on March 31, 2008, 05:32:13 am
Quote
The premise of the book is that if man stayed a hunter-gather and not became civilized, we wouldn’t have any of the problems we face today.

Right, because we would be dealing with all the other problems that civilized society already dealt with before (various diseases, et cetera).

Also, I don't understand this 'if there was less food there would be less people' theory. I mean, I understand that if people don't have food they can't eat and thus starve to death, but if even the most minimal food requirements are met and we can continue to live then there is nothing that is going to stop us from breeding more and thus having more people and thus requiring more food until it becomes absurd not to have civilized groups of people. As far as I can tell this suggests (as a solution to world hunger?) that we bounce somewhere, as a species, between starvation and the minimum amount necessary to survive as individuals so that there is no starvation or overpopulation. I mean... what? Come on, guys.

EDIT: This reminds me of my Modest Proposal assignment, where I suggested mass suicide as a means to end human suffering.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Frisky SKeleton on March 31, 2008, 05:36:28 am
starving people wouldn't be a problem if we stopped making food because everyone that couldn't find their own food would die until only those that the land could support could live

is this what it's saying? it's real but it's horrible and makes no sense.

also now when we make more food the population doesn't increase the population gets obese
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Drule on March 31, 2008, 05:37:07 am
I just finished reading the book called Ishmael and it is amazing! It changed my view of the world lol.
Doesn't everything you read change your view of the world?
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Hundley on March 31, 2008, 05:37:53 am
WHAT IF...

You died tommorrow. Have you led a sinful life? Have you taken Telly Savalas into your heart?

Hi, I’m fdave Hunt—Pastor of Telly Savalas Church.  TSC is a place you will find friendship, chinese food, 24-hour petting zoo, and opportunity for service.  TSC is also a place to find real answers to real problems!  Telly Savalas has proven answers for all of life's situations, and at TSC, we believe, practice, and preach Telly Savalas.  In today’s world, that makes TSC  SOMETHING DIFFERENT!

We at the church of Telly Savalas have three ping-pong tables and a soda machine!

If you care about your eternal soul, please stop by today...

...THIS MIGHT JUST BE WHAT YOU LOOKING FOR
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Bondo on March 31, 2008, 05:46:35 am
If all mankind were to throw down their devices, gizmos, tools, and multinational corporations.  Don loincloths and strike off into the wilderness, there would be mass anarchy for several years to come.  Millions, or even billions would die as people bludgeoned each other to death with rocks and sticks for the best foraging places and hunting grounds.

Then, amidst the corpses, when the chaos died down, only the strongest of man would still be alive, and the women would be enslaved to them as reproductive objects.

Mankind would wander the Earth.  Their thought would degrade to the lowest form, and the search for food and a mate would dominate modern thinking.  Freetime would consist of picking the lice off each other's heads.

Personally, I would prefer to keep the past 10000 years of advancement so I can continue to ponder the concept of the multiverse, think on the theory of relativity, and post things on the intertron.  Besides, I would look terrible in a loincloth.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Artis Leon Ivey Jr on March 31, 2008, 05:48:37 am
hey dok, no joke, have you been to a psychiatrist?

you seem to have no filter for this kind of stuff at all, despite being at least uh...somewhat intelligent I guess. basically you are not horribly retarded and you aren't saying you are arguing for the ideas in the book (even though you said how great it was in post 9/11 and how it changed your life here) but you seem to easily fall into extremely flimsy ideologies and politics without much thought and even if this book had some legitimacy tied to it, it's completely negated by the fact that, well, YOU'RE the one posting about it.

this idea that society is unnatural and animals know how to run the earth and all this confused primitivist nonsense...man, you should really talk to someone I think, because most people figure this shit out.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: crone_lover720 on March 31, 2008, 05:52:08 am
actually I'm a little pissed off that you've taken this so far that now you're preaching how people deserve to die because there isn't enough food for them.

dok, it really bugs me that you don't understand how fucking blessed you are to be able to sit there in front of your computer screen and ramble on about this shit. you don't get how lucky you are to be able to buy your expensive superfood bullshit and pick and choose what's ok for you to eat, on that horribly irrational diet of yours. living in a nice suburban home with your parents, getting your mom to drive you to your nice job, feeding those Jewish kids your green muffins, maybe going home and posting about zionism on the internet. why couldn't they have just dropped you off in the woods like good parents? someplace with loads of dandelions. you might be able to overpower bitches in the wild, think about that. you could have an entire clan of raw vegan anti-zionists, isn't that the life dok
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Artis Leon Ivey Jr on March 31, 2008, 05:57:26 am
Feeding Jewish Kids Green Muffins should be a song by Antiflag.

I dont even know what a psychiatrist would do for him but really this can't be normal!
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: something bizarre and impractical on March 31, 2008, 05:58:06 am
Well, as much as it is apparent Dok presents himself with a leaning towards agreement with some of the ideas presented, to be fair he did say, "I'm not here to argue for or against or anything I'm just curious what your thoughts are," at the very start of his post and I don't think we should attack him for--let alone get emotional over--these ideas no matter how crazy they are.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Artis Leon Ivey Jr on March 31, 2008, 06:12:53 am
Well, as much as it is apparent Dok presents himself with a leaning towards agreement with some of the ideas presented, to be fair he did say, "I'm not here to argue for or against or anything I'm just curious what your thoughts are," at the very start of his post and I don't think we should attack him for--let alone get emotional over--these ideas no matter how crazy they are.

he then followed this statement with another saying that the book had "changed his life" and in other topics has discussed how amazing it is. he may not be here to argue, but when he asks for our thoughts, he can't expect we're going to subtract his already warped worldview from it.

you can't just post basically bullshit theories time and time again and expect people aren't going to take you to task on it.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Hundley on March 31, 2008, 06:14:23 am
if i could be any kind of wild animal i would choose to be a tony danza
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: bonzi_buddy on March 31, 2008, 06:15:15 am
Well, as much as it is apparent Dok presents himself with a leaning towards agreement with some of the ideas presented, to be fair he did say, "I'm not here to argue for or against or anything I'm just curious what your thoughts are," at the very start of his post and I don't think we should attack him for--let alone get emotional over--these ideas no matter how crazy they are.
Oh. Yes. Of course. Er, right you are, he isn't defending the ideas of the book, definitely.

"I was just thinking... you know, this is just a mindplay, nothing serious, not considering, but i was just thinking..."
"Look guys i don't want to argue about this, don't say anything critisizing about this, just, just LOOK what i read today, it's FABULOUS"
"You can't attack me: i'm asking you not to at the very first post!! (!)"
"You can tell me whatever you want but i don't care (oh wait, i do: i pick the comments i want to answer, just in case i can convince somebody from the mob!!)"

I think it's pretty apparent he is testing the ice!

hey dok, no joke, have you been to a psychiatrist?

you seem to have no filter for this kind of stuff at all, despite being at least uh...somewhat intelligent I guess. basically you are not horribly retarded and you aren't saying you are arguing for the ideas in the book (even though you said how great it was in post 9/11 and how it changed your life here) but you seem to easily fall into extremely flimsy ideologies and politics without much thought and even if this book had some legitimacy tied to it, it's completely negated by the fact that, well, YOU'RE the one posting about it.

this idea that society is unnatural and animals know how to run the earth and all this confused primitivist nonsense...man, you should really talk to someone I think, because most people figure this shit out.
you know... i'm not entirely counting it all to that. i call dok as an living example of religious alternate of underground - musician:

if it's anything mainstream . . . I DON'T LIKE IT!!





Dok are you still going for that nutrition - thing... because this shit has been taught at the very basic classes of biology. That gorilla of yours is bullshit.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: dada on March 31, 2008, 06:26:25 am
Well, I barely even know what to say. All joking and genuine disgust in this topic aside, I seriously do believe that you should see a psychiatrist.

Your outlook on the world is so unrealistic that you should seriously consider this option. And no, I'm not joking. You would apparently be okay with people dying because of them not having enough food, as this would "bring back balance". In case you didn't notice, people are already dying in vast regions around the world, mostly close to the equator and in Africa.

You probably don't know it, but you are what they call an "anarcho-primitivist". You believe that society should go back to the hunter-gatherer phase. Anarcho-primitivists believe it's perfectly okay if the world's population goes into free fall as it is unable to support such a style of society. Noam Chomsky has written on this subject:
I do not think they are realising that what they are calling for is the mass genocide of millions of people because of the way society is now structured and organised, urban life and so forth. If you eliminate these structures, everybody dies. For example, I can't grow my own food. It's a nice idea, but it's not going to work, not in this world. And in fact, none of us want to live a hunter-gatherer life. There are just too many things in life that the modern world offers us. In just plain terms of survival, what they are calling for is the worst mass genocide in human history. And unless one thinks through these things, it's not really serious. —Noam Chomsky
If you believe in this stuff, you should go see a psychiatrist. And again, I'm not joking here.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Marcus on March 31, 2008, 06:46:07 am
this is sounding like sid meier civilization logic.  the more food you have the faster your city population grows until it reaches a point where the people are greater than your food production and they all starve.

my suggestion; research light speed warp drives and reach alpha centauri to win the game.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: something bizarre and impractical on March 31, 2008, 06:53:42 am
Oh. Yes. Of course. Er, right you are, he isn't defending the ideas of the book, definitely.

"I was just thinking... you know, this is just a mindplay, nothing serious, not considering, but i was just thinking..."
"Look guys i don't want to argue about this, don't say anything critisizing about this, just, just LOOK what i read today, it's FABULOUS"
"You can't attack me: i'm asking you not to at the very first post!! (!)"
"You can tell me whatever you want but i don't care (oh wait, i do: i pick the comments i want to answer, just in case i can convince somebody from the mob!!)"

I think it's pretty apparent he is testing the ice!

Well, I wouldn't disagree with that (should be somewhat apparent from the way I worded my post, but maybe not). I guess I just don't think the mentality of "THIS IS SO OBVIOUSLY A BAD IDEA THAT YOU ARE AN IDIOT" sort of thing. And I don't believe that asking the question, "Hey, could we live like this?" should be greeted with, "GO SEE A DOCTOR NOW." But, I guess you guys know more about his position than I do.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Doktormartini on March 31, 2008, 06:55:05 am
I am neither for it or against it...it just seems (call me crazy, oh wait you have) that logically if we wish to end world hunger we should stop the mass production of food.  Inevitably millions would die and I agree, that is horrible.  Do you feel there is away to stop world hunger?

Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Marmot on March 31, 2008, 06:58:35 am
Primitivism is a reactionary ideology akin to any other retarded ideology that wishes to send humanity back to the past, like with theocrats and monarchists. The destruction of industrial civilization will come with the death of billions who depend on industralization and mass-production to survive. Its popular with a lot of middle class windbags because the "exotic and idyllic" appeal of living in shit conditions give a meaning to their pathetic lives. While in reality, poor people generally want to enjoy medicine, meat, electricity, and all the comforts that come with industrial civilization.

All this "green" nonsense being spouted by hippies is disgusting and patronizing, and gives the vibe of "putting dem poor peasants in their place".

Ugh, I would punch primitivists in real life.

Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: something bizarre and impractical on March 31, 2008, 06:59:32 am
I am neither for it or against it...it just seems (call me crazy, oh wait you have) that logically if we wish to end world hunger we should stop the mass production of food.  Inevitably millions would die and I agree, that is horrible.  Do you feel there is away to stop world hunger?

If we stop the production of food then THERE IS HUNGER. It resolves nothing.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Marmot on March 31, 2008, 07:00:08 am
Ugh, there hasn't been a GW member that has made me drop the fucking marbles for a while.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Doktormartini on March 31, 2008, 07:01:56 am
If we stop the production of food then THERE IS HUNGER. It resolves nothing.
The theory is that the people that go hungry would die down until there is a balance of people with food. 
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: something bizarre and impractical on March 31, 2008, 07:03:13 am
The theory is that the people that go hungry would die down until there is a balance of people with food. 

Who would then eat, breed, and people would go hungry again.

What is resolved here?

Like I stated in a previous post, the implication seems to be that we bounce between starvation and the minimum food required for survival, which is ridiculous because it a) doesn't solve the fact that some people go hungry, and b) throws away thousands of years of technology and thought.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Marmot on March 31, 2008, 07:04:08 am
The theory is that the people that go hungry would die down until there is a balance of people with food. 

Ugh, you are a piece of shit.

This is why I hate college politics, because its full of similar windbags (except much less nutty) than you.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Marmot on March 31, 2008, 07:07:25 am
long live the deer and grass revolution

Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Achiro on March 31, 2008, 07:08:22 am
everythings going to blow up eventually anyway, I say we slaughter everything we can while we can, eat it all, go out and get high for the rest of our lifes on a bunch of plants we found growing in our bathtubs, And then take to the streets, kill oprah, then throw shit at tigers. It's perfect -.-
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Marmot on March 31, 2008, 07:17:15 am
Btw, this "primitivist" is retarded. The most sophisticated primitivists were abortions of marxist movements, who came to their conclusion through a careful analysis of class society and its dynamics. A lot of them elaborate on marx's theory on "social alienation". then fill it with steroids. Basically, marx argued that the complex division of labor brought by capitalism, was part of the alienation felt by the worker (because instead of doing the WHOLE SHIRT, he just did a fragment and he never saw or felt the final product), and also they elaborate on marx's idea that class society was the product of the development of the means of production and the division of labor that came with it.

However, primitivists claim that the ills of society lie precisely in this development of the means of production, and the division of labor that comes with it (rather than Marx arguing for revolution because he thought the capitalist class was unable to further develop the processes of production). The nuttier ones argue for the destruction of industrial civilization, while the most reasonable ones are just "messiahs" talking about Doomsdays and preparing for the inevitable ecological collapse.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Marmot on March 31, 2008, 07:21:01 am
btw i read through the wikipedia article and it seems like a good novel.

I don't think the author's purpose was the same as the one extracted by Doktormartini.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: JJ on March 31, 2008, 07:52:01 am
I do not consider myself a primitivist, nor do I agree completely with Dok's interpretation of the book, but unlike most people here (it seems) I have actually read this book. And its two sequels. Guess what, it might do you good and if you don't want to visit a library to find out what this bullshit's really about, you can have it right here for free: http://www.geocities.com/friendofishmael/.

I believe it is important to emphasize that Daniel Quinn (the author of the book) is not by any means romanticizing the Golden Days of the Stone Age, and he does not believe that there is one right way for humans to live. Rather, he claims that humans lived in a way that worked for three million years (200 000 years as humans with our brain capacity aka Homo sapiens) and wonders why people are so surprised to find out that a system that was being invented about 10 000 years ago does not work all that well.

Acknowledging that it would be impossible for most civilized humans to return to the hunting and gathering typical of tribes, Quinn argues that modern men and women need to invent a completely different mode of existence. To do this, they must question a basic assumption of all civilized societies: "Civilization must continue at any cost and must not be abandoned under any circumstances." Quinn, borrowing from Richard Dawkins, calls this assumption a "meme," the cultural equivalent of a gene.

Honestly, this book isn't about ditching our computers and running off into the wild as many of you seem to think. I actually urge you to read the book - or at least some of it, and if it bored you then go on and live in Wonderland happily ever after. Nevertheless, it won't turn you into a savage, but it will provide you with some interesting ideas about how we interpret our history.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: something bizarre and impractical on March 31, 2008, 08:18:03 am
Honestly, this book isn't about ditching our computers and running off into the wild as many of you seem to think.

Who?
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: headphonics on March 31, 2008, 08:37:00 am
the book actually sounds sort of cool, but jesus christ, i can't even think of a joke or a statement to express myself here.  doktormartini, you keep me in a state of perpetual semi-amusement.  i cannot believe you are this.... this.... i don't even know.  you're just completely oblivious, and you ALMOST seem to realize it.  i'm sort of curious as to whether or not you'll eventually just buy into some crazy cult, and also how the fuck you got like this and what happens inside your mind that you readily and frequently accept crazy fantasies as reality.  that quote render addressed earlier is absurd.  do you really think animals take what they want and willfully leave the rest for the benefit of other animals?  like, is this REALLY what you think?  you are insane, man.  i mean it!  like steel said, you don't seem profoundly retarded enough that you should be buying into this stupid shit, so really, i can only assume you're somehow imbalanced.  it's like you are subscribing to some lunatic ideology that, on some level, you must know is virtually baseless in every post i see from you, and for what reason i can really only guess at.  mostly, i just really want to know WHAT HAPPENED to make you want to believe in this stuff so badly that you routinely ignore the myriad of reasons why you shouldn't.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Evangel on March 31, 2008, 08:37:51 am
I actually think about this pretty often.  Our civilized society is weakening our gene pool.  Human beings are no longer subject to natural selection, and any person capable of surviving through puberty can reproduce.  It doesn't really matter at the moment, since civilization makes our lives nice and easy, but I think our species will be more refined with the next great disaster (World War 3?).  Maybe we won't have to brush our teeth after all that. 
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: JJ on March 31, 2008, 08:47:16 am
Who?

I just got that feeling from reading some of the replies, for example Bondo's reply about throwing away tools and devices, but perhaps I wasn't being accurate enough about this. Anyway, the point is that this book is NOT about running off into the wild.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Bondo on March 31, 2008, 08:48:16 am
There is a major flaw in this theory.

This theory appears to assume that the reason for increased food production is to feed the hungry.  When in fact, this is simply not the case.  Man is, by nature, greedy, and the sole purpose of increased food production is increased income.  Those who produce the food don't care who it goes to, as long as it goes to someone, and it just so happens that starving third world countries are more than willing to take it off their hands.

Also, population increase is not a direct reaction to food increase.  That would be like saying that population increase is a direct reaction to homicide decrease.  Population increase will happen regardless.  All people have a natural desire to reproduce.  How much food is available does not change this fact.  Decreasing food production counteracts population increase by starving people to death.  So while population increase continues, death by starvation increases as well, reducing the numbers.

Mathematically, sure, decreasing food will ultimately result in decreased population.  But the end never justifies the means.  We have no right to decide that all the starving and destitute need to die so that the comfortable can continue to live comfortably.

Though still, there is no reason to worry.  I stated before, man, by nature, is greedy.  As long as a profit is to be made, the food will keep coming.  We'll have to find another solution to overpopulation.  Might I suggest oceanic or extraplanetary colonization?

And if we're not supposed to eat meat.  Why does it taste so damn GOOD!?
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: something bizarre and impractical on March 31, 2008, 08:50:26 am
I just got that feeling from reading some of the replies, for example Bondo's reply about throwing away tools and devices, but perhaps I wasn't being accurate enough about this. Anyway, the point is that this book is NOT about running off into the wild.

I can understand why you would get the feeling, but the fact is the thread wasn't created to talk about the book specifically, but rather to discuss one (apparent) idea in the book. A lot of us have only been given whatever small amount of information about the book, but I don't think anyone said, "THIS IS WHAT THIS BOOK IS ABOUT. DOK SAID THIS IS IN THE BOOK THEREFORE IT IS THE ENTIRE BOOK."

Yaknow?

EDIT: I'd also just like to thrown this out there that the world population growth is actually SLOWING DOWN. I have absolutely no idea why, but yeah-- I looked at some graphs for awhile before I was distracted by something shiny.

EDIT2: This post is now Bondo approved.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Bondo on March 31, 2008, 08:56:17 am
I think I may bold random words from now on.  It could be my calling card.

Or not.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Kaworu on March 31, 2008, 08:57:43 am
This way of thinking is like trying to find random points and joining them up. There are many, MANY reasons for povert and hunger, to say it's because of food production is pretty absurd, and shows absolutely no knowledge of how appaling life was. There's a very big reason why people progress and have reached where we've reached.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: JJ on March 31, 2008, 09:08:57 am
I can understand why you would get the feeling, but the fact is the thread wasn't created to talk about the book specifically, but rather to discuss one (apparent) idea in the book. A lot of us have only been given whatever small amount of information about the book, but I don't think anyone said, "THIS IS WHAT THIS BOOK IS ABOUT. DOK SAID THIS IS IN THE BOOK THEREFORE IT IS THE ENTIRE BOOK."

Oh, you're right, my bad. I guess I just wanted to defend this book in case somebody would regard it as bad without even having read (about) it due to this topic.

As for anarcho-primitivism and the preachers of it (such as John Zerzan and Derrick Jensen), I think Ran Prieur (http://ranprieur.com/essays/beyondciv.html) makes a good point in his essay Beyond Civilized and Primitive:

Primitivists, understandably, are impatient. They want us to go back to using simple tools and they don't care why we do it. It's like our whole species is an addict, and seductive advanced technologies are the drug, and primitivism is the urge to throw our whole supply of drugs in the garbage. Any experienced addict will tell you that doesn't work. The next day you dig it out of the garbage or the next week you buy more.

What Daniel Quinn says is that the most important thing is to go into a new mode of thinking, to rethink our existence and focus only on useful stuff rather than spending billions of dollars a year on Coca-Cola and sneakers. Regardless of what you think of this book after this topic, I think it would be a good idea to read the novel - it's good.

Edit: Yeah sneakers are useful but I meant buying a new pair every other week aka looking for resources to consume aka shopping for the sake of shopping.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: HL on March 31, 2008, 11:12:30 am
This entire thing is dumb because only idiots remove stuff before thinking of other solutions.

What do you accomplish by doing this? We'll just wind up where we are now cause you know someone's going to write down all this shit we have and people will rebuild society.

Why not advance towards something more healthy that won't kill 50% of the world's population (our future talented minds...) such as expansion into underpopulated places, extra planetary colonization, etc?
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Vellfire on March 31, 2008, 12:20:30 pm
Quote
Animals take what they need and leave the rest for others, animals don’t store food for long periods of time, animals don’t grow there own food, animals don’t kill for pleasure

Dolphins only take what they need and then kill other animals babies and play with them (hint: for pleasure).

Squirrels do tend to store food like crazy.

The only one I can't really say anything about there is that animals don't grow their own food, but fuck, if they knew how they sure as hell would.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: `~congresman Ron paul~~ on March 31, 2008, 01:05:42 pm
The only one I can't really say anything about there is that animals don't grow their own food, but fuck, if they knew how they sure as hell would.

Ants farm aphids.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Vellfire on March 31, 2008, 01:18:02 pm
Ants farm aphids.

Dang, I've never heard of this before.  That is fucking awesome.

[size]too bad there won't be a sim ant 2008 that would be a good feature[/size]
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Ragnar on March 31, 2008, 01:56:19 pm
If I was a primitivist I'm pretty sure I'd be the first one to die so no thanks

Although I do think the only way we're going to solve all our problems is if we just produce so much stuff nobody can be an asshat anymore - I mean really the only reason oil is a problem is because there's only x amount of this thing - but at least it's just that nowadays and I may be a little ignorant but I'm pretty sure we haven't fought a war for ARABLE LAND for a while now

Edit: Also it'd be like 10000 BC and that movie sucked
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: crone_lover720 on March 31, 2008, 02:55:32 pm
I actually think about this pretty often.  Our civilized society is weakening our gene pool.  Human beings are no longer subject to natural selection, and any person capable of surviving through puberty can reproduce.  It doesn't really matter at the moment, since civilization makes our lives nice and easy, but I think our species will be more refined with the next great disaster (World War 3?).  Maybe we won't have to brush our teeth after all that. 
well, despite this being an absolutely horrible post and you obviously having no clue how ns/evolution works

humans haven't been subject to natural selection since the very beginnings of civilization. we're social, we change through social selection. we're selected for and against by an entirely different set of rules. and unlike natural selection, mating isn't random. humans get to choose their mate, and to help with this we've even got this awesome little inborn indicator we call love. I can understand the fantasy though; people who are nutjobs, unintelligent, unattractive, etc are socially selected against in society. after WWIII, who will be left to socially compete with? just imagine if you were the only male left on the planet! sheeww
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: JJ on March 31, 2008, 02:58:04 pm
Edit: Also it'd be like 10000 BC and that movie sucked

FYI, 10000 BC was hardly historically correct in any aspect, but your point is acknowledged and I agree, I wouldn't want to live like a hunter-gatherer either, despite that many anthropologists agree that pre-totalitarian agricultural man was generally happier than we are today (and before you ask I don't have any particular sources for this other than perhaps stuff I've come across here and there so it might not be true but that's beside the point).
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Frankie on March 31, 2008, 03:25:04 pm
I sort of understand the whole "we should get simpler lives" thing. I think youre misunderstanding what the book says.

Its like with Jean-Jacques Rousseau's "lettres morales". Its easy to misunderstand his point in the texts, and think that he says we should BAN ENTERTAINMENT AND ANY OTHER FORM OF PLEASURE BECAUSE IT IS SLOWLY KILLING HUMANITY. While actually, what he means is entirely different.
Rousseau said that we use entertainment in our lives to fill in voids left by our bad memories, to avoid them, forget them, and that we should from time to time stop trying to fill these voids and instead make peace with our past by straightening these memories out, taking them head on. Some sort of meditation philosophy I guess? Except meditation is about thinking of nothing, while Rousseau's "meditation" is more like judging yourself, deciding whether or not things you've done in the past were right, reflect on your decisions. (its not the only thing he talks about in them but yeah)

Likewise I think you sort of took the book to the first degree when it really wasn't meant to be. Sorting out food distribution problems by producing less food and letting people starve to death is silly.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Artis Leon Ivey Jr on March 31, 2008, 04:24:29 pm
yeah wikipedia gave me a Rousseau vibe, not this weird primitivist stuff. then again you could argue that it's the logical extension but I don't lol (propertttyyyy)

well, despite this being an absolutely horrible post and you obviously having no clue how ns/evolution works

humans haven't been subject to natural selection since the very beginnings of civilization. we're social, we change through social selection. we're selected for and against by an entirely different set of rules. and unlike natural selection, mating isn't random. humans get to choose their mate, and to help with this we've even got this awesome little inborn indicator we call love. I can understand the fantasy though; people who are nutjobs, unintelligent, unattractive, etc are socially selected against in society. after WWIII, who will be left to socially compete with? just imagine if you were the only male left on the planet! sheeww

yeah seriously. why would you (meaning Evangel) seriously believe this? do you think people evolved lungs to compete with coal blackening back in the Industrial Revolution or something?

I never thought people would take the plot of Idiocracy seriously!
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: `~congresman Ron paul~~ on March 31, 2008, 05:41:27 pm
Even if you accept the radically inaccurate 'our gene pool is weakening' argument, our technical achievements dramatically overscore our biological failings. Besides, our technology is almost part of our species by extension - humans evolved to use tools, if anything we are reaching our extreme biological potential by utilizing effective tools!

I'd like you to show me a spider capable of walking on the moon
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Artis Leon Ivey Jr on March 31, 2008, 05:54:12 pm
spidermoon, spidermoon
does whatever a spider should
spins a web, on the dark side
catches thieves just like moon flies
look up! here comes the spidermooooon.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Vellfire on March 31, 2008, 06:06:28 pm
A spider on the moon would just float away probably.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Artis Leon Ivey Jr on March 31, 2008, 06:08:14 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toba_catastrophe_theory

Doktormartini does this give you a boner?
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Marcus on March 31, 2008, 06:12:34 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toba_catastrophe_theory

Doktormartini does this give you a boner?

that theory is wrong.  everyone knows the earth is only 5,000 years old
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: dada on March 31, 2008, 06:40:23 pm
The theory is that the people that go hungry would die down until there is a balance of people with food. 
They already are dying right now.

Are you totally oblivious to what's going on in the poor parts of the world? There are people lying on the ground and waiting to die because they lack the strength to get up and beg for food right now.

Your idea, limiting food production to allow people to die faster so that everybody can be fed, fails on so many levels I don't even know where to start. Your idea is virtually the same as decimation. You might as well tell the army to go out in the streets and shoot half the people they see: the result would be the same. You say that this would allow us to feed the remaining people, but have you thought even for a second about how devastating it is to cast away such a huge asset of human capital? (You know, aside from the fact that invariantly killing people is absolutely horrible.) Such an act would leave mankind worse off than before. And it's so ridiculously simple to figure this out. You aren't thinking very hard about this, are you?

[size]Also, I really feel terrible about being a backseat mod all the time but I wonder why Marmot got warned twice for responding to that post. First one wasn't that bad, second one wasn't even remotely insulting or belittling. I'm fine with mods warning people if they feel it's right, but, y'know, there's nothing wrong with just quoting the post that you warned and saying "this is why you're not supposed to do this".[/size]
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Marcus on March 31, 2008, 06:46:25 pm
Quote
Are you totally oblivious to what's going on in the poor parts of the world? There are people lying on the ground and waiting to die because they lack the strength to get up and beg for food right now.

yeah but i think what doktor is trying to say is that those people wouldn't have been born if there wasn't an influx of food to begin with.

to put it simply, this primitivismismwhatever seems to work on the same logic as the overpopulation of animals.  people hunt animals because if they didn't, there wouldn't be enough food to feed the growing population and the animals would die regardless.  if humans were hunters and gatherers, then there wouldn't be a large amount of hungry people because everyone would hunt for their food.

but therein lies the stupid logic.  you have to assume that EVERY human spat right out of the womb is capable of hunting for their food.  children and the elderly will either starve to death or their hunter would have to make a stockpile.  a stockpile of food gives humans more incentive to laze about.  lazing about brings along boredom and then humans start inventing and creating art.  the art leads to religion, alphabet, and math.  all of that leads to civilization.

our sapience keeps us on the path of advancement.  the only way to be PRIMITIVE is to actually deevolve back to the point where we're nothing but instinct driven animals.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: dada on March 31, 2008, 07:05:28 pm
to put it simply, this primitivismismwhatever seems to work on the same logic as the overpopulation of animals.  people hunt animals because if they didn't, there wouldn't be enough food to feed the growing population and the animals would die regardless.  if humans were hunters and gatherers, then there wouldn't be a large amount of hungry people because everyone would hunt for their food.
Actually, the fact most people can't hunt for their food isn't even the most major problem. The problem is that the Earth is simply unable to sustain such a large hunter-gatherer society. Experts have estimated that, in a good case scenario, the Earth would, under such circumstances, be able to support only 1/100th of the current world population. But most likely much less than that.

Imagine having to go hunting for food, in your neighborhood, right now. How many neighbors do you have?

yeah but i think what doktor is trying to say is that those people wouldn't have been born if there wasn't an influx of food to begin with.
What he's saying is that people who can't get food would die, and the fewer people there are, the less food you need to be able to keep the rest well-fed.

Anarcho-primitivists state that the hunter-gatherer society is better because a society based on agriculture promotes sharp class divisions. People are less equal in a society that incorporates agriculture because there is the possibility of spending time building a real society of a much higher standard.

Such a thing ignores the fact that agriculture leads to an improved life. Would you rather lead the life of a hunter-gatherer than the life you're living now? No? That means agriculture must have gotten us somewhere..
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Marcus on March 31, 2008, 07:07:50 pm
Quote
People are less equal in a society that incorporates agriculture because there is the possibility of spending time building a real society of a much higher standard.

I thought people would be less equal because you have to have someone who controls the distribution of food which automatically gives them power.

Unless you lived in a Marxist government but we all know that will never ever happen in the history of the world.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: dada on March 31, 2008, 07:10:35 pm
I thought people would be less equal because you have to have someone who controls the distribution of food which automatically gives them power.
Well, that's right. Basically, since there's time to actually build a real society, inequality occurs. You mention one good example: people get different roles when they start agriculture. One thing leads to another, and before you know it you're standing inside the Pantheon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantheon%2C_Rome).
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: bonzi_buddy on March 31, 2008, 07:12:09 pm
ROUSSEAU
You know Frankie, i was going to quote one of the privitism - comments with "rousseau :rolleyes:​" but uh, that's not exactly how he has been portrayed to me.
actually i just feel stupid for commenting about a philosopher from lacking information! I guess i should read him in the future as well.

Also has anybody noticed that this topic has been good so far  :fogetshifty:
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: JJ on March 31, 2008, 07:13:37 pm
but therein lies the stupid logic.  you have to assume that EVERY human spat right out of the womb is capable of hunting for their food.

The hunting-gathering tribes of the past (and in some remote locations where they still exist) worked simply because they were tribes. Nobody went hungry unless the entire tribe went hungry. Acting egotistically didn't increase anyone's chance of reproductive success. Letting the rest of the tribe starve simply to feed yourself wouldn't do you any good, as there would be a greater chance of finding food if you were among many strong individuals. There is a reason why people lived in tribes (and as stated, still do in some places) and that's because it worked, and still works wherever they can be found. Our totalitarian agriculture is destroying ecosystems and 75-200 species go extinct every day, and we might not be affected by this today but there may come one day when our ancestors will look back and ask themselves: "What were they thinking?"

Now as for me, I do not advocate primitivism as the ultimate way of living, let alone a lifestyle preferable to any other. I'm simply saying that if people wanna do that, then let them - they're certainly not destroying the Earth as much as any "civilized" person, but what we (people of our culture, East and West) have done is to assimilate/chase off/kill any people getting in the way of our business (for a rather recent example in history, read about native Americans during 15th/16th century.) I for one do not believe that ditching all we got right here is gonna do any good. The important change exists in the minds of the people. It's about time people step out of this cultural prison and start dealing with things that are not only subjectively useful (people find drugs useful, hence rich druglords) but stuff that really matters - if anything along those lines exists.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Mince Wobley on March 31, 2008, 07:15:06 pm
What I think is that some day the wise scientists will invent a new way of life better than this one right now just like they invented ways of life that have replaced feudalism, slavery and so on




animals don’t store food for long periods of time

Not true, some of them do

Quote
, animals don’t grow there own food,

This isn't true either as some animals also do this

Quote
animals don’t kill for pleasure

Yes they do
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: dada on March 31, 2008, 08:20:11 pm
And yeah, what is it with you and animals, Doktormartini? You also only eat raw food, and one argument you usually hear "raw foodists" say is "because animals don't, either".
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: im_so_tired on March 31, 2008, 08:45:42 pm
Anarcho-primitivists state that the hunter-gatherer society is better because a society based on agriculture promotes sharp class divisions. People are less equal in a society that incorporates agriculture because there is the possibility of spending time building a real society of a much higher standard.

Such a thing ignores the fact that agriculture leads to an improved life. Would you rather lead the life of a hunter-gatherer than the life you're living now? No? That means agriculture must have gotten us somewhere..

Just to carify: The issue with agriculture societies is not necessarily the division of roles because similar role distinctions exist in hunter-gatherer societies but the surplus time that is a result of an agricultural society creates  distinction between hunter-gatherers who spend most their time searching for food. It feels like it's a similar distinction that exists between the leisure (middle) class now and a typical hard-working lower class. There is great value in this leisure time and before you know it you need soceital super structures to control the increased population. so you've got all the roman politicians dancing in the pantheon while slaves pave streets.

Maybe the more interesting thing is what improved life really is? Having time to do nothing? In our society it seems like leisure time is at the expense of others' work. Whereas before in mythologized and fantasized times of hunting and gathering everyone was on the same page. Honestly neither are extraordinary for everyone. I think the biggest problem with agriculural societies is extremely large size that it tries to maintain regardless of differing ideaologies of its people. It is difficult to please all the people of a huge society because groups have conflicting needs&wants.

Also if anyone is really interested in all this civilized vs. uncivilized and justice vs. injustice you should check out Waiting for the Barbarians by J.M. Coetzee - really good.

Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Artis Leon Ivey Jr on March 31, 2008, 08:58:19 pm
Coetzee is a great writer and I haven't read that book but I'm gonna second it anyways lmao.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Evangel on March 31, 2008, 09:16:20 pm
well, despite this being an absolutely horrible post and you obviously having no clue how ns/evolution works

humans haven't been subject to natural selection since the very beginnings of civilization. we're social, we change through social selection. we're selected for and against by an entirely different set of rules. and unlike natural selection, mating isn't random. humans get to choose their mate, and to help with this we've even got this awesome little inborn indicator we call love. I can understand the fantasy though; people who are nutjobs, unintelligent, unattractive, etc are socially selected against in society. after WWIII, who will be left to socially compete with? just imagine if you were the only male left on the planet! sheeww

i do understand evolution, i was just putting it in animalistic (primitive) terms.  i understand what you mean by social selection, though.

maybe our population is getting dumber because nerds cant get laid.  then again, they often end up rich and find a golddigger, so it all works out.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: something bizarre and impractical on March 31, 2008, 09:21:25 pm
i do understand evolution, i was just putting it in animalistic (primitive) terms. (LOL!!) i understand what you mean by social selection, though.

maybe our population is getting dumber because nerds cant get laid.  then again, they often end up rich and find a golddigger, so it all works out.

No, you obviously don't, as your post (AND THIS POST) are so horrible terrible ack bad...
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Evangel on March 31, 2008, 09:33:01 pm
No, you obviously don't, as your post (AND THIS POST) are so horrible terrible ack bad...

you post are bad!

edit:  Actually what I'm talking about is human beings' evolution in physical terms.  Since humans don't require physical strength and agility (though it is a plus socially) like they might have before, I imagine those attributes aren't as prominent as they once were.  Most people require dental work these days to keep their teeth from rotting out as well.  I understand fully that our evolution has taken a completely different direction since early civilization.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: something bizarre and impractical on March 31, 2008, 10:09:56 pm
you post are bad!

edit:  Actually what I'm talking about is human beings' evolution in physical terms.  Since humans don't require physical strength and agility (though it is a plus socially) like they might have before, I imagine those attributes aren't as prominent as they once were.  Most people require dental work these days to keep their teeth from rotting out as well.  I understand fully that our evolution has taken a completely different direction since early civilization.

In physical terms as opposed to what exactly? You obviously do not understand evolution.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Evangel on March 31, 2008, 10:23:00 pm
I understand evolution perfectly.  I really don't need to explain it to you.

I'm talking about physical might as opposed to the ability to use tools, intelligence, and most recently, self-awareness.  Instead of the biggest fastest fucking monkey in the pack surviving, he who can best manipulate his environment will survive.  Do you not see what I'm talking about?  Physical strength has been replaced with intelligence. 
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: headphonics on March 31, 2008, 10:27:32 pm
hey catslacks, everyone really wants to see you tell evangel he "clearly doesn't understand evolution" over and over again.  please keep doing it.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Evangel on March 31, 2008, 10:34:03 pm
hey catslacks, everyone really wants to see you tell evangel he "clearly doesn't understand evolution" over and over again.  please keep doing it.

yeah im getting some serious deja vu here. 

i hope you, catslacks, understand wtf im saying, because i'm not going to reword it again.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: something bizarre and impractical on March 31, 2008, 10:36:18 pm
yeah im getting some serious deja vu here. 

i hope you, catslacks, understand wtf im saying, because i'm not going to reword it again.
Ok, my bad, but you seem to be implying the evolution takes away certain characteristics that are not used and improves others which are used which isn't necessarily accurate.

It confuses my obviously inferior mind thay lacks the perfect understanding of the topic you have when you say things like, "but I think our species will be more refined with the next great disaster (World War 3?).  Maybe we won't have to brush our teeth after all that." Do you really believe we will evolve so that we won't have to brush our teeth after WW3 or that, provided there is anything left and we can sustain ourselves, there will be any prominent changes to humans? How long would you expect to wait before we see these changes?
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Evangel on March 31, 2008, 11:15:43 pm
Ok, my bad, but you seem to be implying the evolution takes away certain characteristics that are not used and improves others which are used which isn't necessarily accurate.

It confuses my obviously inferior mind thay lacks the perfect understanding of the topic you have when you say things like, "but I think our species will be more refined with the next great disaster (World War 3?).  Maybe we won't have to brush our teeth after all that." Do you really believe we will evolve so that we won't have to brush our teeth after WW3 or that, provided there is anything left and we can sustain ourselves, there will be any prominent changes to humans? How long would you expect to wait before we see these changes?

millions of years.

if civilization crumbles and humans survive in a post-apocalyptic world, we will, in fact, evolve into a very foget-like creature. :fogetmmh:
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Beasley on April 01, 2008, 03:13:35 am
i haven't read the whole topic but it seems to me this kind of thinking is akin to "many people get murdered every day so let's nuke a few countrys then there will be less people to murder hence less murders."

it's just like... WHAT
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Jaruten on April 02, 2008, 02:03:05 am
Ok, my bad, contrary to expectation you seem to be implying the evolution takes away certain characteristics that are not used together with improves others which are used which isn't necessarily accurate.

Yep that's true... As in, to what I learned from school, the currently accepted theory of evolution is not that one which states that if u don't use an organ it will gradually disappear, but it is that one which states that the individuals that develope (sort of randomly) the characteristics that are best for survival will be the ones that will survive and pass their genes; thus the existence of our organs not relaying in the use we put on them.

Regarding the topic Doktormartini I think that the theory is quite non-interesting and quite pointless and that you should maybe read some more valuable pieces of literature with more important meditations about the world and reality in terms of epistemology, metaphysics and (to a lesser extent though) ethics; because in my oppinion the world works in such a way that it is impossible for you to be happy unless somebody else is suffering at the same time somewhere, and nothing can be done about that....... or at least nothing as easy as reducing the production of food.
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: Bravo on April 02, 2008, 04:16:41 am
dude wtf why's everything in polisH???
Title: Primityzm? Co o tym myslicie?
Post by: alucard on April 02, 2008, 09:11:07 pm
We have listened to monkeys in the past, and they have failed us.

(https://legacy.gamingw.net/etc/imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/EPH/8130~George-W-Bush-Monkey-Posters.jpeg)

(https://legacy.gamingw.net/etc/z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/K/1/bush_chimps2.jpeg)