3 ms·
The article doesn't say if the tribes were exceeding Dunbar's number ? > And most of the time everyone went to some lengths to avoid being singled out for self
by ttoinou 9y ago
The article doesn't say if the tribes were exceeding Dunbar's number ?
> And most of the time everyone went to some lengths to avoid being singled out for selfishness or self-importance. Unsurprisingly, this created an atmosphere that was harmonious and that was torn asunder only rarely when someone felt wronged.
Can we assume the atmosphere was good just like that ?
A good book on the topic - on the opposite side of this article - is Helmut Schoeck's "Envy" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmut_Schoeck#Envy:_A_Theory_of_Social_Behaviour https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helmut_Schoeck#Envy:_A_Theory_... ), in which the author rather assume that theses kind of societies were oppressive and gives example of people fleeing out of there in hope to build a better future for them
- bobthechef 9y agoIt's quite common for people to idealize something foreign they don't understand, whether a romanticized tribal life or some mythical Shangri-La in the East. And on egalitarian: http://www.cslewis.com/c-s-lewis-and-kurt-vonnegut-on-egalitarian-tyranny/ http://www.cslewis.com/c-s-lewis-and-kurt-vonnegut-on-egalit...
- adrianratnapala 9y agoWell whatever we think of the overall point on equality, I have to congratulate Lewis on: The real reason for democracy is just the reverse. Mankind is so fallen that no man can be trusted with unchecked power over his fellows. Aristotle said that some people were only fit to be slaves. I do not contradict him. But I reject slavery because I see no men fit to be masters.