3 ms·
Your description of them sounds nothing like my understanding of their culture and lives I got from the book. My point isn't to glorify anything (nor was the bo
by spodek 9y ago
Your description of them sounds nothing like my understanding of their culture and lives I got from the book. My point isn't to glorify anything (nor was the book's) anyway.
There is plenty of evidence countering a faith in growth. A culture that has existed for several orders of magnitude longer than ours is strong evidence. It would even if they were as ignorant and fearful as you describe them. That there were the opposite strengthens the case.
I'm not sure if you were suggesting that people in our culture are not ignorant or fearful, but I see a lot of it, or if you're suggesting that past flourishing means it will continue, but I wouldn't bet on it unless we change a lot.
- ThomPete 9y agoWhat in my description of their lives is incorrect according to the book? The culture you are referring to did so for 100.000 years because it couldn't consume enough of its surroundings for it to have to worry about anything. We don't live in such a world and unless you can give me an alternative to growth that allows all the people who haven't gotten up to our standards of living then I am not sure what you are trying to get at. Of course, our culture is also ignorant compared to the future that's not the point. The difference is that our culture is learning and evolving, their culture wasn't until they got out of their environment and started exploring the rest of the world. I am not talking about past flourishing I am saying that the only way (I would welcome arguments for the opposites, the bushmen isn't one) for humans to keep flourishing is growing.