5 ms·

from their faq (http://www.uncontactedtribes.org/articles/3109-questions-and-answers-uncontacted-tribes http://www.uncontactedtribes.org/articles/3109-questions

from their faq (http://www.uncontactedtribes.org/articles/3109-questions-and-answers-uncontacted-tribes http://www.uncontactedtribes.org/articles/3109-questions-and...): "uncontacted tribes will have seen aeroplanes on numerous occasions. The idea that this damages their self-image and/or spiritual beliefs belongs in the realm of fiction, and is based on the false supposition that their cultures are fragile. Experience shows that such peoples are in fact robust and well able to adapt to outside goods – most have been doing so for a very long time. Tribal peoples are not destroyed when they get or see things from outside, but by violence and disease as their lands are invaded."

fingerprinter 16y ago
I have to call BS on this. It may not "hurt" them, but it does influence/effect them. It has to. Going way back to my anthro classes, all primitive cultures crafted religious beliefs as survival mechanisms, to pass down stories and things that would benefit future generations etc etc. It was also a way to explain what they couldn't explain but still experienced (weather, natural disasters...) and this would fall into that category. What the FAQ did was use inflammatory language (damage, fragile) rather than talk about how this might shape and craft their thoughts and beliefs. If we haven't contacted them, we simply cannot know if IT DID impact them.
- chc 16y ago
  You're being nitpicky. The point is that they won't form a religion around it and it won't have any major "The Gods Must Be Crazy"-style impact on their culture. Yes, it will have some effect, and so will a butterfly flapping its wings in China.
vietor 16y ago
I did not mean to suggest that they would deviate significantly from the norm of any other group of people presented with unexplainable phenomena throughout the remainder of human history. Given the variance in how smoothly minor points of difference in mythology have gone down in the rest of history, it was not intended to indicate any additional fragility over baseline humanity. Suggesting that it damages anything is a significant value judgment. To suggest that notable, repeated, unexplained phenomena would have no impact at all whatsoever is sufficiently at odds with the entirety of human history, culture, and the general body of human mythology, that I'd like to see a stronger citation than the paragraph on their website if you find one.
Groxx 16y ago
>Experience shows that such peoples are in fact robust and well able to adapt to outside goods Yes, fairly often by either adding it to their mythology or creating a cargo cult: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult Whether either of those count as "damage" is academic; it's change. Either we inflict more change or we try to prevent all change.
- pessimizer 16y ago
  That's a false dichotomy.
  - Groxx 16y ago
    "do or do not" is a false dichotomy? Any contact causes change, so the only way to prevent forcing change is to prevent all contact.
    - angus77 16y ago
      Or they could go, "Oh, wasn't that weird!" and then forget about it.
      - Groxx 16y ago
        Sure, just like I'm sure you'd forget seeing a literal flying saucer, glowy lights and everything. Just like all the alien-visitation advocates forget it, and don't try to tell others.
        angus77 16y ago
        First, you're making the assumption people have actually seen such things, rather than making up stories to draw attention to themselves. Second, a helicopter high in the sky in broad daylight would be far less freaky. Third, it's not inevitable that just anyone goes and form entire religions and mythological worlds based on seeing something fly by in the sky. You're average person just simply isn't that creative.

fingerprinter 16y ago

I have to call BS on this. It may not "hurt" them, but it does influence/effect them. It has to. Going way back to my anthro classes, all primitive cultures crafted religious beliefs as survival mechanisms, to pass down stories and things that would benefit future generations etc etc. It was also a way to explain what they couldn't explain but still experienced (weather, natural disasters...) and this would fall into that category. What the FAQ did was use inflammatory language (damage, fragile) rather than talk about how this might shape and craft their thoughts and beliefs. If we haven't contacted them, we simply cannot know if IT DID impact them.

chc 16y ago
You're being nitpicky. The point is that they won't form a religion around it and it won't have any major "The Gods Must Be Crazy"-style impact on their culture. Yes, it will have some effect, and so will a butterfly flapping its wings in China.

vietor 16y ago

I did not mean to suggest that they would deviate significantly from the norm of any other group of people presented with unexplainable phenomena throughout the remainder of human history. Given the variance in how smoothly minor points of difference in mythology have gone down in the rest of history, it was not intended to indicate any additional fragility over baseline humanity. Suggesting that it damages anything is a significant value judgment. To suggest that notable, repeated, unexplained phenomena would have no impact at all whatsoever is sufficiently at odds with the entirety of human history, culture, and the general body of human mythology, that I'd like to see a stronger citation than the paragraph on their website if you find one.

Groxx 16y ago

>Experience shows that such peoples are in fact robust and well able to adapt to outside goods Yes, fairly often by either adding it to their mythology or creating a cargo cult: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult Whether either of those count as "damage" is academic; it's change. Either we inflict more change or we try to prevent all change.

pessimizer 16y ago
That's a false dichotomy.
- Groxx 16y ago
  "do or do not" is a false dichotomy? Any contact causes change, so the only way to prevent forcing change is to prevent all contact.
  - angus77 16y ago
    Or they could go, "Oh, wasn't that weird!" and then forget about it.
    - Groxx 16y ago
      Sure, just like I'm sure you'd forget seeing a literal flying saucer, glowy lights and everything. Just like all the alien-visitation advocates forget it, and don't try to tell others.
      - angus77 16y ago
        First, you're making the assumption people have actually seen such things, rather than making up stories to draw attention to themselves. Second, a helicopter high in the sky in broad daylight would be far less freaky. Third, it's not inevitable that just anyone goes and form entire religions and mythological worlds based on seeing something fly by in the sky. You're average person just simply isn't that creative.