Daniel Quinn's "Ishmael": Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Social Sciences » Daniel Quinn's "Ishmael" » Daniel Quinn's "Ishmael"

Page: 1 2

Daniel Quinn's "Ishmael"

Objectivist
banned

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Nov 24, 2003

Total Topics: 23
Total Posts: 177

Posted 05/24/04 - 06:17 PM:	#11
well, im not the one to debate about what i read a few years ago, but ive perused thro his site and definlty found vestiges of what i previously said. man of tradition wrote: You realize hunter/gatherers' idea of their neighbors almost mandated a constant state of war and total indifference to their neighbor's survival that is not always true... if resources arent scarce, what would be the motive behind 2 tribes fighting each other? i do see some "possible motives" but once again, they are only "possible" :/

Man of Tradition
banned

Usergroup: Members
Joined: May 14, 2004
Location: NJ

Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 49

Posted 05/24/04 - 07:56 PM:	#12
Questions of honor- if a prestigious hunter is spat at by another prestigious hunter, if an inter tribal marriage fails to produce good children and the families feud, etc etc. And theres always women. Even in times of plenty, the men always want the other tribes women.
"...but then it is precisely in the 'reign of quantity' and only then, that the opinion of the majority can claim to be taken into any consideration at all." -Rene Guenon, The Reign of Quantity and the Signs of the Times

strokan
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 07, 2004
Location: Nova Scotia

Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 3

Posted 06/07/04 - 08:32 PM:	#13
Lion packs hunt side by side without much fued. Most of the fued between lions would be for leadership. The leavers Quinn talks about, which was mentioned earlier can compete, but not declare war. By war, he means disabling their chances to live. As well, I can't find my ishmael book at the moment, but I believe Quinn said you could have your western civilized gadgets such as computers, but not let your possesion own you.

blur
Aspirant

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 15, 2004

Total Topics: 0
Total Posts: 22

Posted 06/15/04 - 08:24 PM:	#14
I read it a few years ago, so I won't attempt to dig in too much, but the post on overpopulation not being a real issue (poohat's first objection) is just that-- a bunch of sh*t. First of all, we already are overpopulated. Overpopulated does not equal immediate [human] apocalypse. It initially means a lesser quality of life for humans and other organisms (and extinctions for other organisms and opportunities for organisms that thrive in human overpopulation (rats, microbes, cockroaches, etc.)). Then it means a collapse of the social system (i.e. the economy), and then the social fabric (i.e. peoples' patriotism and faith in their system) and then you have a real problem, way in advance before you'd ever have mass human extinction. Chaos, yes. Death, yes. But many survivors. Probably too many. I suppose if you wanted to look at it from an economic standpoint, you could figure that each human = the resources he uses. So some countries would have a "lesser" population than others, even if their numbers were actually larger. So, I have news for you: the US is actually way more overpopulated than India and China.

Belgarath
Initiate

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Oct 26, 2009

Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 6

Posted 10/26/09 - 08:45 AM:	#15
rabeldin wrote: The reason that we see so much frivolous activity in modern (American ?) is that we put too much money in the hands of frivolous teenagers and expect them to mature automatically. This debases all the activity that panders to these wealthy adolescents. Who can feel proud of designing $100 sport shoes when you can get some for $20? Who can feel proud of producing music (?) cd's that advocate violent machismo? Who can feel proud of manufacturing a SUV that is too big, overpowered, and will be used to intimidate the car in the next lane? I, for the most part, agree with you. On the other hand, teenagers are not the only frivolous ones. All the age groups are frivolous in their own manner. Most teenagers of this time want expensive, and primarily useless objects, for example:video games. Adults buy expensive and useless foods, clothings, cars... et cetera. The teenagers get the poor habits from the parents and adults around them. Of course, not all teenagers and adults are this way. But, "mother culture" says that this is the right way to live, so, the mass majority do so. I once again agree with you, for the most part. Congratulations to the man/woman who created the $100 shoe. You have truly expanded the corruption. Ditto for the car. I have to disagree with you on the violent music, however. I listen to what one would call pretty violent music. But I take it with a dose of philosophy. Violent music is not the problem. What the problem is is the kids, or adults, who listen to this music and use it as an excuse to do something dangerous or stupid. There is talented "violent" music out there, but, the wrong crowd listens to it. Bashing violent music is like bashing knowledge to me. Knowledge, in a sense, can be very violent and dangerous. But, it is not the knowledge's fault it is the way it is. It is the person who wields it and possibly uses it for the wrong reasons.

Page: 1 2

Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.