Comments on: Solitary, Poor, Nasty, Brutish, and Short http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/ se wo were fi na wosan kofa a yenki Fri, 05 Sep 2008 10:20:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: The Anthropik Network » Solitary, Poor, Nasty, Brutish and Short http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-14230 The Anthropik Network » Solitary, Poor, Nasty, Brutish and Short Fri, 23 Jun 2006 16:23:13 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-14230 [...] "...and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." So wrote Thomas Hobbes in Leviathan. Anthropology has shown this to be an entirely false description of the state of "primitive" society, but it seems to be an increasingly accurate description of civilized life. The first element, "solitary," is an important element to consider, but one that I've generally tried to stay away from for one simple reason—how do you prove that civilization isolates people? It seems that the scientific evidence is starting to come in. Americans are far more socially isolated today than they were two decades ago, and a sharply growing number of people say they have no one in whom they can confide, according to a comprehensive new evaluation of the decline of social ties in the United States. [...] […] “…and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” So wrote Thomas Hobbes in Leviathan. Anthropology has shown this to be an entirely false description of the state of “primitive” society, but it seems to be an increasingly accurate description of civilized life. The first element, “solitary,” is an important element to consider, but one that I’ve generally tried to stay away from for one simple reason—how do you prove that civilization isolates people? It seems that the scientific evidence is starting to come in. Americans are far more socially isolated today than they were two decades ago, and a sharply growing number of people say they have no one in whom they can confide, according to a comprehensive new evaluation of the decline of social ties in the United States. […]

]]> By: Anonymous http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-3692 Anonymous Tue, 13 Dec 2005 17:58:22 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-3692 That is Steve's personal choice. I agree. You can still be friends and disagree. I am not trying to undermine your tribe. In fact, I admire that your tribe is vibrant and healthy despite your differences. That is a sign of intelligence. That is Steve’s personal choice. I agree. You can still be friends and disagree.

I am not trying to undermine your tribe. In fact, I admire that your tribe is vibrant and healthy despite your differences. That is a sign of intelligence.

]]> By: Jason Godesky http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-3684 Jason Godesky Tue, 13 Dec 2005 15:41:01 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-3684 If you're dumb, surround yourself with smart people. If you're smart, surround yourself with smart people who disagree wth you. Steve & I are both awfully smart fellows, if I do say so myself, and I think our philosophical differences keep the tribe healthy and vibrant. I disagree, but my word is not law in the tribe. We live by concensus--even when the concensus goes against me. Abiding by the will of the tribe doesn't mean I have to stop disagreeing, but it does mean I live by the will of the tribe. It means being part of something. Our practical goals are definitely close enough to coexist, so your anonymous efforts to undermine that very thing that I hold most dear--my tribe--are as foolish as they are unappreciated. If you’re dumb, surround yourself with smart people.

If you’re smart, surround yourself with smart people who disagree wth you.

Steve & I are both awfully smart fellows, if I do say so myself, and I think our philosophical differences keep the tribe healthy and vibrant. I disagree, but my word is not law in the tribe. We live by concensus–even when the concensus goes against me. Abiding by the will of the tribe doesn’t mean I have to stop disagreeing, but it does mean I live by the will of the tribe. It means being part of something. Our practical goals are definitely close enough to coexist, so your anonymous efforts to undermine that very thing that I hold most dear–my tribe–are as foolish as they are unappreciated.

]]> By: Anonymous http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-3681 Anonymous Tue, 13 Dec 2005 15:04:40 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-3681 Steve, If you believe that horticulture is viable, you might as well find another tribe to join. Jason has made it perfectly clear that foraging is the only viable means of subsistence in the long-term. You don't, and I think you are accurate. If Jason is going to be so adamant, you should find other people like yourself. Steve,

If you believe that horticulture is viable, you might as well find another tribe to join.

Jason has made it perfectly clear that foraging is the only viable means of subsistence in the long-term. You don’t, and I think you are accurate.

If Jason is going to be so adamant, you should find other people like yourself.

]]> By: The Best Kept Slaves » The Anthropik Network http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-3589 The Best Kept Slaves » The Anthropik Network Fri, 09 Dec 2005 21:14:54 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-3589 [...] As for the Hobbian claim of "nasty, brutish, and short," I will not waste more time on it then to merely suggest that I occasionally break into spurts of maniacal giggles when someone uses this argument in my hearing. For a more detailed treatment see Solitary, Poor, Nasty, Brutish, and Short. [...] […] As for the Hobbian claim of “nasty, brutish, and short,” I will not waste more time on it then to merely suggest that I occasionally break into spurts of maniacal giggles when someone uses this argument in my hearing. For a more detailed treatment see Solitary, Poor, Nasty, Brutish, and Short. […]

]]> By: The State of Nature » The Anthropik Network http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-541 The State of Nature » The Anthropik Network Tue, 26 Apr 2005 23:31:06 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-541 [...] of such "anarchy," in the traditional, perjorative sense of the word, was a life that was "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and shor [...] […] of such “anarchy,” in the traditional, perjorative sense of the word, was a life that was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and shor […]

]]> By: The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race » The Anthropik Network http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-326 The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race » The Anthropik Network Fri, 18 Mar 2005 22:54:22 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-326 [...] homas Hobbes assure us--without any empirical validation--that any other way of life is â??nasty, brutish and short.â?? Befo [...] […] homas Hobbes assure us–without any empirical validation–that any other way of life is â??nasty, brutish and short.â?? Befo […]

]]> By: Janene http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-321 Janene Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:57:59 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-321 Hey Steve -- No, I don't mean walking away entirely.... rather, I see it as a chance to 'restore' an environment that 'we' have damaged (on the order of a personal hobby as opposed to a 'lifestyle' or 'job')... but once done, I think it is best to not interfere with the natural evolution of the space after the initial effort. In other words, if I plant species A-P around a plot of land, and next year I look and discover that species K has not survived or species N has overrun a certain area... well, so be it. There's some interaction there beyond what i know, so I'm not going to be cocky enough as to come in and try to 'restore' it to my original intention.... Janene Hey Steve –

No, I don’t mean walking away entirely…. rather, I see it as a chance to ‘restore’ an environment that ‘we’ have damaged (on the order of a personal hobby as opposed to a ‘lifestyle’ or ‘job’)… but once done, I think it is best to not interfere with the natural evolution of the space after the initial effort. In other words, if I plant species A-P around a plot of land, and next year I look and discover that species K has not survived or species N has overrun a certain area… well, so be it. There’s some interaction there beyond what i know, so I’m not going to be cocky enough as to come in and try to ‘restore’ it to my original intention….

Janene

]]> By: Steve Thomas http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-320 Steve Thomas Tue, 15 Mar 2005 02:19:31 +0000 http://anthropik.com/2005/03/solitary-poor-nasty-brutish-and-short/#comment-320 <!-- spamk : Comment text: '"my other concern about permaculture has been and remains the implication that we can know enough to build and maintain entire ecosystems by our will...." Actually, I think there is any reason to believe that. Every animal and plant helps build and maintain an ecosystem simply by existing. A beaver does this every time he creates a dam and builds an artificial lake. To be more concrete, the famous â??3 sistersâ?? garden, in which corn is interplanted with beans and squash, is how you will find teosinte, wild beans and squash growing in the Mexican highlands. Eventually the Kayapo will abandon a garden, and the resultâ??is another piece of forest, only a piece of forest which is especially abundant, because 1. theyâ??ve gathered seeds from across a wide geographic area to plant there and 2. theyâ??ve planted food-plants for any number of different animal (game) species. These gardens just become patches of forestâ??only patches of forest that are more valuable than usual to humans and species that provide food or other humans (including the plants, which are grown with other plants which foster their growth and away from plants which hinder them), down to the bottom level of the ecosystemâ??one of their neatest strategies is to ring their forest-gardens with banana trees that attract wasps which defend their gardens from marauding ants (perhaps in return for the free housing?). Martsâ??Zerzan is fine to use permaculture as a transition strategy himself, as long as he and his followers donâ??t force their ways onto meâ?¦in part because I really donâ??t understand them. Janeneâ??I agree with you in seeing permaculture as a restorative tool. Do you mean walking away, as in, restoring an ecosystem and then leaving it completely? Because I disagree with that; sometimes thatâ??s what we should be doing or even are obligated to do, but I also see it as the best way to creating sustainable human habitats. Some internet resources for permaculture include www.permaculture.net http://www.globalideasbank.org/site/bank/idea.php?ideaId=1. The best introduction I know of is the book Gaiaâ??s Garden: A Guide to Home-Scale Permaculture. The information on Tikopia comes from Jared Diamondâ??s latest book, Collapse; his source is Tikopia: and Ecology on a Polynesia Outlier. Additional information on the success of this type of agriculture can be found in other ethnographies about other stuff entirely, like Nest in the Wind, a study of Pohnpei, the capital of Micronesia. The Kayapo agricultural system is detailed briefly in The Gaia Atlas of First Peoples and extensively in Indigenous Knowledge and Ethics. (Iâ??ve forgotten all of these authorsâ?¦will post later.) ' matched ((holdem|texas|poker|casino|online|gambl|blackjack|game|free).*){2,} --> "my other concern about permaculture has been and remains the implication that we can know enough to build and maintain entire ecosystems by our will...." Actually, I think there is any reason to believe that. Every animal and plant helps build and maintain an ecosystem simply by existing. A beaver does this every time he creates a dam and builds an artificial lake. To be more concrete, the famous â??3 sistersâ?? garden, in which corn is interplanted with beans and squash, is how you will find teosinte, wild beans and squash growing in the Mexican highlands. Eventually the Kayapo will abandon a garden, and the resultâ??is another piece of forest, only a piece of forest which is especially abundant, because 1. theyâ??ve gathered seeds from across a wide geographic area to plant there and 2. theyâ??ve planted food-plants for any number of different animal (game) species. These gardens just become patches of forestâ??only patches of forest that are more valuable than usual to humans and species that provide food or other humans (including the plants, which are grown with other plants which foster their growth and away from plants which hinder them), down to the bottom level of the ecosystemâ??one of their neatest strategies is to ring their forest-gardens with banana trees that attract wasps which defend their gardens from marauding ants (perhaps in return for the free housing?). Martsâ??Zerzan is fine to use permaculture as a transition strategy himself, as long as he and his followers donâ??t force their ways onto meâ?¦in part because I really donâ??t understand them. Janeneâ??I agree with you in seeing permaculture as a restorative tool. Do you mean walking away, as in, restoring an ecosystem and then leaving it completely? Because I disagree with that; sometimes thatâ??s what we should be doing or even are obligated to do, but I also see it as the best way to creating sustainable human habitats. Some internet resources for permaculture include www.permaculture.net http://www.globalideasbank.org/site/bank/idea.php?ideaId=1. The best introduction I know of is the book Gaiaâ??s Garden: A Guide to Home-Scale Permaculture. The information on Tikopia comes from Jared Diamondâ??s latest book, Collapse; his source is Tikopia: and Ecology on a Polynesia Outlier. Additional information on the success of this type of agriculture can be found in other ethnographies about other stuff entirely, like Nest in the Wind, a study of Pohnpei, the capital of Micronesia. The Kayapo agricultural system is detailed briefly in The Gaia Atlas of First Peoples and extensively in Indigenous Knowledge and Ethics. (Iâ??ve forgotten all of these authorsâ?¦will post later.)