Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

uncontactedtribes.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 378 posts

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#201

Post by [deleted] »

pyre wrote: post #165
xenophanes wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should give them access to technology and to our way of life. Our way of life is better. Preserving their backwards culture so they can continue lives of misery and suffering is just as disgusting as the Prime Directive. Help is exactly what I would want from advanced alien visitors. I don't want them to respect my culture just because it is mine; I want something better for myself, not cultural relativism. There…

> We should give them access to technology and to our > way of life. Our way of life is better. So, we should like emulate Canada over the mid-20th century, and kidnap children from tribal lands and force them into orphanages/boarding school where most of them will be abused physically and sexually in the process of trying to 'train the savage' out of them? edit: Missed raganwald's post and Wikipedia link

[deleted]

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#202

Post by lwhi »

Groxx wrote: post #184
lwhi wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe children weren't killed, but Australian Aboriginal society has been completely decimated - many of the stories involved are heartbreaking, and these people now have many many more problems that ever before. I'm sure that regimes that take part in ethnic cleansing believe that they're doing the right thing. A sense of superiority helps them to make their choices. Whether violence is used or not, in some ways, th…

> many many more problems that ever before. That's committing the same error the OP made, but in reverse. Instead of viewing your lifestyle as superior, you clearly view theirs as superior, since adopting the new one has been a net loss. "many of the stories involved are heartbreaking" - I don't doubt that. But all change comes with cost, though that one was certainly far higher than it should have been. Citing past…

It really is immensely complicated - I have no solutions, but I do know that we have to learn from history.

Good intentions almost always fail. People deserve respect. Superiority is often an illusion. Motivations are multifaceted.

I know I'd be happier with a simple life, and - perhaps romantically - I imagine that these people might have a better life than we do. Realistically, that's just as likely as the opposite - because, for all the interesting things our lives have to offer, there are some deep-routed problems we face, that we're very far from solving.

I think I said it in another post - but I'll reiterate before signing off .. I really hope this tribe is left alone. If a lot of contact is made, I'm sure no good will come from it.

EDIT: Nice debating with you btw.

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#203

Post by raquo »

xenophanes wrote: post #27
raganwald wrote: post #9

You know that Golden Rule?" Not the one that VCs quote, but the one that goes "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you?" We should think about that when we choose how to deal with uncontacted tribes. It may be that one day another intelligence will need to decide how to deal with us, and on that day I hope we can say, "Yes, we used to have a habit of massacring technologically inferior peoples we encounte…

We should give them access to technology and to our way of life. Our way of life is better. Preserving their backwards culture so they can continue lives of misery and suffering is just as disgusting as the Prime Directive. Help is exactly what I would want from advanced alien visitors. I don't want them to respect my culture just because it is mine; I want something better for myself, not cultural relativism. There…

Obligatory: http://lesswrong.com/lw/y4/three_worlds_collide_08/

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#204

Post by CamperBob »

forensic wrote: post #185
CamperBob wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Modern anthropology and the best science actually indicates that tribal hunter-gatherers experience higher levels of happiness and satisfaction than your typical citizen of an agricultural society. So does the typical Oxycontin addict. 'Happiness and satisfaction' are weasel words that ultimately have no objective meaning. Tribal hunter-gatherers have healthier diets, live longer without outside interference, No, the…

I wasn't the one making the argument that these people are experiencing misery/suffering. Misery and suffering is no more objective than happiness and satisfaction. I would argue that both of these things are objective and can be observed in the brain and well as inferred from other criteria. >No, they do not. Yes, they do. We can go back and forth like this all day or you can make a real argument. Read SEX AT DAWN a…

You're the one who made the specific assertion; it's up to you to deliver the citation. "Read book X" isn't sufficient.

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#206

Post by xenophanes »

jeisenberg wrote: post #200
xenophanes wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a joke. You're mistaken in your assumption that I am ignorant of philosophy just b/c A) I didn't cite anyone impressive in my initial comment B) we disagree. Yes I am aware of Chomsky (in more detail than New Yorker articles offer). Yes I am aware of what ontology is. Yes I have studied philosophy. Do you want me to counter-cite philosophers for you to read? You might learn something by reading _The Myth of the F…

You certainly don't argue or write like you studied anything but Glenn Beck's wikipedia page. Can you please explain to me how I am 'trashing' freedom, and human rights? Cultural rights ARE human rights. And please explain to me how Karl Popper somehow supports your theory of 'objective value.' Popper's arguments concern the contingency of analyses. Contingency, not objectivity. I only reserve the ad hom's for close-…

Popper also wrote the books "Objective Knowledge" and "In Search of a Better World". These titles are perhaps a giveaway.

Throughout he advocates the existence of objective truth, and things like the possibility of a "better" world. He is no relativist. He thinks some ideas and values are better than others. He makes explicit statements (and arguments) in favor of objective ethics in, e.g., _The World of Parmenides_, ch 2, addendum 2. Also of course he favors the open society and thinks it is better than the closed society.

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#207

Post by Naga »

rubashov wrote: post #90
raganwald wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does your perspective differ from the perspective of the missionaries who attempted to bring "salvation" to indigenous peoples around the world? How does your perspective differ from the perspectives that led to the imposition of the Residential Schools? https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Canadian_Indi... Also, nothing I wrote says anything about providing them with access , it says something about de…

What about the missionaries who stopped indigenous peoples' crazy blood soaked ways and widespread human sacrifice rituals? The Aztecs in particular were quite psycho. With the daily stories of decapitated bodies and mass slayings in connection with the drug cartels in Mexico, sometimes a wonder about the cultural link back to the Aztec ways.

The scope of human sacrifice was largely exaggerated. The book 1491, by Charles C. Mann, puts the amount of people sacrificed per year by the Aztecs at 3000-4000, out of around 30 million people. He compares that to England, which executed 75000 people between 1530 and 1630. England had about 1/10th the population of the Aztecs, and if it had the same, it would have been executing 7500 people each year, around double the Aztecs were.

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#208

Post by forensic »

billswift wrote: post #178
gort wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> warfare was less painful for all involved Does that book or other sources you have give a rough idea of how rare/common death by warfare/violence is in this type of society?

I haven't read that book, but others have estimated (it varies between tribes) that roughly half of all males that make it to adulthood die of violence - either within (murder and vengeance killing) or between tribes (warfare). One source, though I don't remember what kind of numbers he gave is Pinker's The Blank Slate ; which also excoriates the kind of "primitive worship" that seems to be common in these comments.

There is a big difference between "primitive civilizations" and hunter gatherer tribes.

People often forget that the Aztecs were an agricultural civilization. So were most Native Americans like Pocahontas -- yes, Pocahontas' dad was a farmer. Shocking, I know.

The comparison is between different forms of past societies, not between past societies and today.

Until very recently, plenty of men in agricultural societies died from violence and war.

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#210

Post by Groxx »

lwhi wrote: post #202
Groxx wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> many many more problems that ever before. That's committing the same error the OP made, but in reverse. Instead of viewing your lifestyle as superior, you clearly view theirs as superior, since adopting the new one has been a net loss. "many of the stories involved are heartbreaking" - I don't doubt that. But all change comes with cost, though that one was certainly far higher than it should have been. Citing past…

It really is immensely complicated - I have no solutions, but I do know that we have to learn from history. Good intentions almost always fail. People deserve respect. Superiority is often an illusion. Motivations are multifaceted. I know I'd be happier with a simple life, and - perhaps romantically - I imagine that these people might have a better life than we do. Realistically, that's just as likely as the opposite…

I can agree with almost all of that except "almost always fail". Saying that means you think the amount of evil in the world outweighs the amount of good, to which I must ask, "how are you measuring?" I'd argue that good goes unnoticed and taken for granted because it's the norm; people notice exceptions far more quickly than what they encounter every day. We're able to debate on the internet; is that not good? How many billions (trillions?) of good interactions happen because of the internet?

Quite a few people choose simpler lives voluntarily. If they're happy, that's fantastic, they made the right choice. I de-clutter occasionally, which is a similar choice. But I see no reason that any style of life could be without deep-rooted problems. Ours is most likely ennui; I'll take that, because it's a personal problem that can be battled personally, and solved. Our culture could be better for such things, but not without other costs / problems which really can't be predicted, so I won't try. Many more "primitive" cultures have problems which are less solvable by individuals - food, safety, health, and yes I'm oversimplifying and it could be insulting, but it's more true of smaller, more isolated, less-technologically-advanced cultures than it is of the rest of the world.

We have far more individual options than they do, if only because we can choose to do without them (see: Amish). Which may be the root of the problems with our culture. But I like personal problems. I can fix them. I can't fix society as easily.

edit: I've enjoyed it too :)

Post reply on HN