Why the world is a better place than before

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian
You base this on what? I agree that farming resulted in more complex societies. What I'm getting at is that even the simpler ones had a hierarchical structure, as far as I know. Do you have a source that says otherwise (I admit I'm no expert)?

-Arrian

"Hunter-gatherer societies also tend to have non-hierarchical, egalitarian social structures. However, this is usually only the case in the more mobile societies, which generally are not able to store surplus food. "

wiki

Surplus of food is one cause of hierachialism.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Pekka
I pick choices. I CAN still pick bushman.

And you probably will because you are addicted to modern life (stress etc.). You can't really comprehend another life.

[Pekka]

But you can?

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Kidicious


"Hunter-gatherer societies also tend to have non-hierarchical, egalitarian social structures. However, this is usually only the case in the more mobile societies, which generally are not able to store surplus food. "

wiki

Surplus of food is one cause of hierachialism.

Source good.

I agree that settled, agricultural socities had more structure and hierarchy. I question whether hunter-gatherer societies really have none (non-hierarchical, egalitarian). Further, even if that is the case, I still question how they treat... deviation, shall we say, from social norms.

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Pekka
But you can?

My mind is much freer than yours.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian


Source good.

I agree that settled, agricultural socities had more structure and hierarchy. I question whether hunter-gatherer societies really have none (non-hierarchical, egalitarian). Further, even if that is the case, I still question how they treat... deviation, shall we say, from social norms.

-Arrian

It's never going to be very hierarchial when everyone shares in the work.

[Pekka]

And you claim this because..... ?

[Arrian]

It's never going to be very hierarchial when everyone shares in the work.

"Not very hierarchical" =! No hierarchy at all.

Further, "very little hierarchy" does not mean that there are no social norms, and that people are necessarily tolerant of deviation from said norms (for instance, homosexuality).

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Pekka
And you claim this because..... ?

If everyone works they are the same class. There is no justification of an elite class. With the developement of property ownership and religion you have justification for elitism.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian


"Not very hierarchical" =! No hierarchy at all.

Further, "very little hierarchy" does not mean that there are no social norms, and that people are necessarily tolerant of deviation from said norms (for instance, homosexuality).

-Arrian

A social norm and intoleration of differences is different. Think about what causes such oppression.

[Arrian]

From the wiki on bushmen:

Traditionally the San possessed no status hierarchies[9]. They had no "chief" but instead made decisions among themselves, on a consensus basis. Women's status was relatively equal[10].

Ok, I concede on "no hierarchy" then. No mention is made of tolerance of differences, but depending on what "relatively equal" means in regards to women, it may be a reasonable assumption that it's a fairly tolerant society, which would render my argument re: gays in primitive societies weak.

I maintain my argument about hunger/famine, and of course life expectancy is obviously vastly different.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

In reading some more online about the Bushmen, it seems that there are very clearly defined gender roles. Men and women are expected to act a certain way.

Which to me is a "social norm." Now, what happens if an individual in that society doesn't conform?

-Arrian

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Arrian
In reading some more online about the Bushmen, it seems that there are very clearly defined gender roles. Men and women are expected to act a certain way.

Which to me is a "social norm." Now, what happens if an individual in that society doesn't conform?

-Arrian

If you would have read a little farther you would have seen that there was significantly less social pressure placed on people.

One thing that you have to realized is that even though they had a sexual division of labor this division was not a source of exploitation or oppression as in more modern societies.

[Eli]

Kid:

WTF would you do all day long as a bushmen? There's no famine and in two hours you gathered all the berries you can eat. Now what? Even modern TV and commercials don't dumb people down as fast as staring at rocks all day long.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Eli
Kid:

WTF would you do all day long as a bushmen? There's no famine and in two hours you gathered all the berries you can eat. Now what? Even modern TV and commercials don't dumb people down as fast as staring at rocks all day long.

Probably talk to people or just enjoy the birds chirping. Maybe go for a walk. Lots of things.