Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe • Hacker News Board

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#151

Post by mrleinad » Sat, Feb 05, 2011, 12:10 AM UTC

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #64

d3x wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really hope you are kidding. If not this is so typical of the american way of thinking. Yes, we are so superior lets convert them all to our [insert culture, religion etc...]. What is so bad about leaving them alone? I would bet they are much happer than the majority of the FB and Twitter obsessed narcissist that I run into every day. While we are at it lets make sure they all become good christians too because any…

What is so bad about leaving them alone? I would bet they are much happer than the majority of the FB and Twitter obsessed narcissist that I run into every day. What is so bad is you making the decision for them -- one way or the other. It's that kind of pompous paternalistic attitude that caused all kinds of pain and misery. If they are happy with a life expectancy of 30, of having mothers die in childbirth commonly…

Then first, you must comprehend yourself how all of these "improvements" would impact their society and minds. And then, you have to teach them enough so they can understand all of those facts you just learned, so they can take an INFORMED decision. That alone would make you get in contact with them, show them things they have never seen before, change their culture in unimaginable ways.

There's no "interface" here to which you can give them access, and expect that if they choose not to use it, their lives would remain as they were.

If you touch it, you change it. You don't know how. Perhaps you will destroy it and will never know what of all those things you showed/gave them did it.

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#152

Post by Groxx » Sat, Feb 05, 2011, 12:12 AM UTC

lwhi wrote: post #107

Groxx wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you need some philosophy, metaphysics, and Lincoln-Douglas style debate classes: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln-Douglas_Debate edit: how about a starting point (in no way intended to be snide / insulting, I'm entirely serious about this): Murder is wrong, right? Why? Completely objectively , why?

My previous reply was a bit terse - sorry. I was referring to two (apparent) opposite points of view, and it seemed like you were using semantics to disagree. I read the last part of that sentence as you personally stating that the OP had a moral obligation, which I now realise might have been incorrect. -- I understand that people form their own moral compass, and that views differ - but sometimes, I think there are…

The cultural contamination taboo is pretty clearly not so "universally felt", though. You must contaminate (significantly) to discover their decision so you can respect it, or you must prevent all contamination, when you could be improving their lives (note: could be. To disagree is to state our/your culture / technology is in every way deficient compared to theirs, the "noble savage" viewpoint).

Whether it's a majority opinion or not, it's hard to say. I encounter both sides very regularly, while you apparently don't. Such is life.

As to the holocaust deniers, yes, I would. Because I disagree with them, and because it's essentially an intentionally-ignorant standpoint that doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

---

But as to contaminate-or-not, I do prefer contamination so they can choose. Otherwise, it seems to me we're treating them like animals in a zoo, incapable of choosing intelligently for themselves. It also implies our culture is just so virulent that any who come in contact with it are sure to lose their way, join us heathens, and destroy their culture; again, insulting their intelligence and based on what's essentially a superiority complex.

For myself, I'll always choose contamination over being walled off. Others will disagree. But until we're capable of knowing they disagree, we either force some contamination to find out or we force them behind walls, taking away their choice. I find walls to be more offensive to sentients as a whole.

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#153

Post by ugh » Sat, Feb 05, 2011, 12:16 AM UTC

raganwald wrote: post #123

ugh wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When we invented cars we lost our own culture’s tradition of riding horses. It used to be the case that everyone knew how to ride a horse, now only a select few decide to preserve that tradition. Even they ride only for sport and fun, a cheap imitation of what it meant to ride a horse 200 years ago. Cars viciously destroyed the role horses play in our society, that part of our culture is forever lost. (I’m not sad.)

Good point, but we do have examples of people who choose to ride horses as part of their daily life: Certain Amish and Mennonites. They know all about technology, they just make certain choices about it and we have found a way to get along with them making those choices.

The individuals in the tribe should ideally be allowed to do the same. (I know that’s not easy. Said tribe would be forever changed if we explained to them what they could do in such a way that they can make an informed decision.)

The whole question of whether we should in principle allow access seems easy to me but I also think that many massively underestimate the enormity of that task. I fit the culture I’m living in because my parents invested massive amounts of energy, time and money over two decades to make me part of that culture. I would guess that a similar effort would be required for the individuals in that tribe and they have no parents to help them along.

Much can go wrong. Individuals of the tribe might end up much more miserable or, indeed, dead. This is one of those problems that seems to me to be in principle easy but in practice extremely hard to actually solve.

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#154

Post by uxp » Sat, Feb 05, 2011, 12:18 AM UTC

mrleinad wrote: post #139

xenophanes wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I readily acknowledge we may agree more than it first appears given the particular emphasis we each chose. But I do think there is substantive disagreement here within the realm of non-violent (and, dare I say it: civilized) ways to approach the matter. The very idea of having a way that "we" deal with "uncontacted tribes" is collectivist on both ends. Individuals should do whatever they want without violating anyone…

Yes. And not every kind of discrimination or restriction is wrong. We must not contact them, unless they want to contact us. We cannot be certain of the impact of our presence to their minds. Just as we can't be certain (no, we can't) of the impact of an alien presence in our planet.

It makes you wonder what they were thinking when they saw the plane flying around over their heads. In almost every shot of the tribe, they were all standing and staring. I doubt it is the first time they have seen some sort of modern technology, but it certainly isn't common.

Modern man is taking away their land to oil drilling and logging. Personally, I think we should treat it as tribal leaders once did. We are the enemy. If we want to preserve them, then we should not study them as subjects either. That is their land, their home. Let them be.

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#155

Post by russell_h » Sat, Feb 05, 2011, 12:18 AM UTC

Devilboy wrote: post #41

russell_h wrote: post #24

Absolutely fascinating stuff, and for me anyway it raises some interesting ethical questions. Making contact with these tribes would (I would imagine) destroy a lot of culture, to say nothing of the obvious issues of disease, etc. On the other hand, in a society where we claim to value innovation and progress, failing to offer these tribes the benefits available to others feels a little wrong. Given the choice betwee…

Traditionally those legal problems are solved by simply granting these people exceptions. I mean aboriginal people and native Americans do get special treatment in some cases.

Yeah, I expect thats how it would be handled here (although "granting an exception" to the Constitution could get tricky, depending on the timeline in this hypothetical).

What I really meant (and I wasn't very clear on this) was more of how could we ethically reconcile our laws with our desire, if we have one, to preserve such tribes. For the most part it seems like if you have to special-case something you're doing something wrong to begin with. So either allowing such tribes to exist without interference should run counter to what we're trying to accomplish with our laws, or our laws don't actually say what we intend them to.

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#156

Post by Groxx » Sat, Feb 05, 2011, 12:18 AM UTC

lwhi wrote: post #150

uvdiv wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's your ludicrous conflation of the OP's genuine concern for the material welfare of these people with "ethnic cleansing" that's abhorrent.

Okay, it's an extreme example .. but it definitely exists on the same side of the scale. -- Look at what happened to Australian Aboriginals - the settlers who separated kids from their families had the best of intentions - but they also had a sense of superiority which gave them an utter contempt for the culture of the children in question. There are some parallels between those settlers and the OP's statement: " The…

I've got to agree with the parent to yours, it's still a different scale. Ethnic cleansing seeks to destroy that which is different. Ethno-centric superiority complexes (like this, not necessarily all) seek to improve that which is different. They are capable of causing the similar outcomes, but I know of no examples (they didn't kill the children), and the motivations are almost total opposites. Both are essentially insulting to the other group though, absolutely, but in different ways.

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#157

Post by nerme » Sat, Feb 05, 2011, 12:20 AM UTC

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…

OUR way of life is better?

No, dude, YOUR way of life is better.

If these people are brought in to our culture they're fucked. Plain and simple.

What do you think they're going to do, move to the Bay Area and start a social media company?

They're on the bottom rung. They've got some red body paint, some banana trees, and some thatch roofed huts. They're wealth exists solely in their own way of life. As soon as they're faced with our way of life, they're fucking worthless.

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#158

Post by T_S_ » Sat, Feb 05, 2011, 12:21 AM UTC

It's absurd to say they are "uncontacted". They are humans after all. How can such a smart crowd fall for that headline stuff?

Concerns about their public health and inability to defend their property rights (our interpretation of those rights, at least) may be well founded. However, this whole episode says more about how Brazil tries to control loggers than it does about indigenous people. They are finally starting to slow down deforestation, using any tool they can.

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#159

Post by Devilboy » Sat, Feb 05, 2011, 12:24 AM UTC

russell_h wrote: post #155

Devilboy wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Traditionally those legal problems are solved by simply granting these people exceptions. I mean aboriginal people and native Americans do get special treatment in some cases.

Yeah, I expect thats how it would be handled here (although "granting an exception" to the Constitution could get tricky, depending on the timeline in this hypothetical). What I really meant (and I wasn't very clear on this) was more of how could we ethically reconcile our laws with our desire, if we have one, to preserve such tribes. For the most part it seems like if you have to special-case something you're doing…

Some of these tribes are even cannibals, they kill people and eat them. Should we turn a blind eye to that too? I don't know. It's a hard question.

Re: Aerial footage of uncontacted Amazon tribe

#160

Post by Charuru » Sat, Feb 05, 2011, 12:24 AM UTC

bugsy wrote: post #127

Charuru wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hypothetically what would you do if these tribes had a system of slavery?

What are you doing about the non-hypothetical slavery in the US right now?

You're talking about human trafficking/sex slaves?

It's already illegal. I leave that up to the cops.