Were we better off in a state of nature?

[coberst]

Were we better off in a state of nature?

How credible was the concept of the Noble Savage?

The thing is that society is constantly changing. How can we create a stable society within such a dynamic world culture? We need an ideal as a North Star. An ideal does not depend upon what is or what was but upon what we want or what we need—hopefully that are similar.

I think that Socrates may very well be the first person to recognize what we need. Socrates recognized that the basic need was for wo/men to awaken their critical faculties. Socrates was perhaps the first to recognize that humans are too easily delighted by the praise of their fellows and that this sought after social recognition prevented their free and enlighten action. Humans need to share in a shared social fiction. The anxiety of self-discovery is a constant source of internal conflict for humans.

It appears that human play forms “may even outwit human adaptation itself”. The created fiction becomes more real than reality itself. New humans enter this world and immediately begin the process of survival which becomes “a struggle with the ideas one has inherited”. This fiction reality destroys our rational adaptive process which can react to the real world; we are too busy reacting to our fictional play.

Is it appropriate to say that the Amish might be considered to be the modern Noble Savage?

Is it possible that we could study the Amish as a means for creating a better society?

[Epsilon=One]

Originally Posted by coberst

Were we better off in a state of nature?

How credible was the concept of the Noble Savage?

The thing is that society is constantly changing. How can we create a stable society within such a dynamic world culture? We need an ideal as a North Star. An ideal does not depend upon what is or what was but upon what we want or what we need—hopefully that are similar.

I think that Socrates may very well be the first person to recognize what we need. Socrates recognized that the basic need was for wo/men to awaken their critical faculties. Socrates was perhaps the first to recognize that humans are too easily delighted by the praise of their fellows and that this sought after social recognition prevented their free and enlighten action. Humans need to share in a shared social fiction. The anxiety of self-discovery is a constant source of internal conflict for humans.

It appears that human play forms “may even outwit human adaptation itself”. The created fiction becomes more real than reality itself. New humans enter this world and immediately begin the process of survival which becomes “a struggle with the ideas one has inherited”. This fiction reality destroys our rational adaptive process which can react to the real world; we are too busy reacting to our fictional play.

Is it appropriate to say that the Amish might be considered to be the modern Noble Savage?

Is it possible that we could study the Amish as a means for creating a better society?

I've quoted/reposted all your comments and questions as they are most apropos.

Evolution towards comlexity is inevitable; however, such evolution, if not carefully managed, will lead to its premature destruction.

There seems little doubt that the environment, in its entirety, is not better off because of most anthropoidal evolution.

Interesting that you mention the Amish. Most persons might consider that the Amish could learn and enjoy much from our materialism; I believe that in many instances the opposite is more true; particularly concerning a "self-satisfying" life.

It is such questions that are the concern of Conceptualism.

[coberst]

Originally Posted by Epsilon=One

I've quoted/reposted all your comments and questions as they are most apropos.

Evolution towards comlexity is inevitable; however, such evolution, if not carefully managed, will lead to its premature destruction.

There seems little doubt that the environment, in its entirety, is not better off because of most anthropoidal evolution.

Interesting that you mention the Amish. Most persons might consider that the Amish could learn and enjoy much from our materialism; I believe that in many instances the opposite is more true; particularly concerning a "self-satisfying" life.

It is such questions that are the concern of Conceptualism.

I examined your reference and I must say I am speechless.

[Epsilon=One]

Originally Posted by coberst

I examined your reference and I must say I am speechless.

Rare as such effort and examination is, "speechless" is seldom the reaction; nor the intended response.

Regrettably, continuity, updated posts, and additional posts; from mid-May until the end of September; of great significance for clarification, logical support, and enigmatic resolution have been lost when the forum server crashed without current backup available.

This lost data may not have aided resolution; though, it may have inspired some comment concerning “the meaning of existence” and other imponderables that may actually be amenable to philosophical logic.

[coberst]

Originally Posted by Epsilon=One

Rare as such effort and examination is, "speechless" is seldom the reaction; nor the intended response.

Regrettably, continuity, updated posts, and additional posts; from mid-May until the end of September; of great significance for clarification, logical support, and enigmatic resolution have been lost when the forum server crashed without current backup available.

This lost data may not have aided resolution; though, it may have inspired some comment concerning “the meaning of existence” and other imponderables that may actually be amenable to philosophical logic.

I often appreciate the speachless reaction to things that I post because speachless is several reactions higher than the constant negativity that I normally receive.

I almost always save anything I write in my hard drive. Computer memory is virtually free. My hard drive is filled with inspiration and non sense.

[Epsilon=One]

Originally Posted by coberst

I often appreciate the speachless reaction to things that I post because speachless is several reactions higher than the constant negativity that I normally receive.

I now fully understand; both your comment and anguish.

Thanks!

[Epsilon=One]

Originally Posted by coberst

I almost always save anything I write in my hard drive. Computer memory is virtually free. My hard drive is filled with inspiration and non sense.

Backup is everything; I'm from the era of hard-wired programming and complete unreliability.

I too save everything on several humongous drives, mirroring, removable drives, DVD backup, and multiple networked platforms dating from the late '70s.

I can understand your eclectic memory content; however, memory wasn't always cheap. I can remember when memory was $1.00 per 2Kb (about one double spaced page) with IBM magnetic cards; and, a 5Mb hard drive was considered cheap memory at $2,000 per drive. I began with word processing in 1977 with an IBM System 6. (In those days a dollar was worth about $10 today when you fully consider "spendable" income.)

In 1977, a word processor service agreement was more than $1,000 per month on a yearly contract. (And with hard-wired programming requiring almost weekly replacement of boards and ink-jet printer heads, I'm sure IBM lost money. The technicians seemed to be full time accessories to the upright piano-sized consoles . . . both printers and keyboard-monitor-card readers.

Today, a data loss of such magnitude on a forum the size of PMF is inconceivable.

With around 80 domains, I couldn't otherwise survive without constant backup and mirroring.

However, I don't control the domain, where the problem is great for many reasons. The statistics and post numbers are badly skewed, which has decimated Google listings, rankings, and access. Reposting of some 400 posts is time consuming and quite difficult when many of them are interlinked with other skewed member posts. Continuity is lost with dialogue as members add on to truncated threads, etc. etc.

Because of many of these problems I have been restricting my informative links within the forum and many explanatory posts until I can more properly asses the situation. My time is quite limited; particularly, as there has been a considerable amount of recent forum editing required with a coincidental rise in spam and phishing posts.

[coberst]

Bill Moyer has a video wherein he discusses the book “Amish Grace” that you might find to be very interesting regarding the Amish response to their tragedy. Compare that Amish response to their tragedy and the response of America to our 9/11 tragedy.

located at pbs.org/moyers/journal/10052007/watch4.html

[Epsilon=One]

Originally Posted by coberst

Bill Moyer has a video wherein he discusses the book “Amish Grace” that you might find to be very interesting regarding the Amish response to their tragedy. Compare that Amish response to their tragedy and the response of America to our 9/11 tragedy.

located at www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/10052007/watch4.html

I'm familiar with Bill Moyers comments regarding the Amish. It's unfortunate that more of our citizens don't understand the Amish (I was raised in that part of the country) . . . and, Bill Moyers.

I have maintained that much of America's response to terrorism is cowardly. Both because of said cowardice and the result of propagandistic fear-mongering to divert attention from the economic rape of its citizens.

It is this cowardice that largely makes possible the current, "impossible" situation we find ourselves to be in as a nation.

Are, we digressing? Probably not too far if considering the general topic and thread.

[coberst]

All animals, except humans, live in a total state of nature. All animals, except humans, are guided totally by instinct. Civilization is a mark of this transition from instinct to ego domination of behavior.