There is no State of nature. By "nature" - I should say - men live in a state of culture. Unless they are monkeys.

The concept does exist in philosophy, but it is a working concept - in opposition to cultureS in general - to avoid that one culture be taken as reference in opposition to other cultures.

Quite clearly, the Amish build a disctinct culture.

__________________
______________________Own only what you can always carry with you: know languages, know countries, know people. Let your memory be your travel bag.”___________________Alexander Solzhenitsyn

But to separate us from our hunting and gathering past we could say we now live in a state of domestication, as opposed to a state of freedom.

Andrew

__________________
Ethanol is a fabulous solution to our energy dilemma because it will provide more fuel for us to drive around and look for food.

-- Unknown

If the contention is that we've moved away from some more natural state, or simply just 'away from nature', then surely that must be considered a move towards freedom?

Men are monkeys. Women are .. well, women.

What could be more free than not having to pay taxes, not having to pay for food, not having to labor on the farm or in the office?

When people were relatively few, and food was free and abundant, that is freedom.

Life was a bit shorter, but it was healthier.

Andrew

__________________
Ethanol is a fabulous solution to our energy dilemma because it will provide more fuel for us to drive around and look for food.

-- Unknown

What could be more free than just paying to get served?

When people had to endure diseases, carry their kids and elders around and compete with others for the "free" and "abundant" food, that was to endure diseases, carry kids and elders around and compete with others for the "free" and "abundant" food. You say that's freedom, I say I don't have the same dreams.

Life was a bit shorter because it wasn't all that good for the health.

Where do you get the money to pay to be served? Is the server equally as free?

Disease only became a real problem when people domesticated animals on farms. Pigs especially. Last i checked we still have to care for our children. You automatically assume competition, but there are many examples of cooperation as well. And yes, in many places at many times the food was free and abundant. People did not have to work near as hard to feed themselves as they do today. That is freedom.


There was far less disease, far less cancer, far less toxins, far more exercise, the air was cleaner, and the social cohesiveness much more meaningful and rewarding. There is no doubt they had a healthier diet. Any comparison of the general health of existing tribal peoples to modern industrial/agricultural peoples proves this.

Andrew

__________________
Ethanol is a fabulous solution to our energy dilemma because it will provide more fuel for us to drive around and look for food.

-- Unknown

Perhaps most definitive of all would be that a tribal hunter/gatherer person could easily survive in the absence of civilization. Whereas a domestic laborer has no chance at surviving in the absence of civilization. He no longer possesses the skills or the land to live as the animal he is. That is the complete opposite of true freedom.

Andrew

__________________
Ethanol is a fabulous solution to our energy dilemma because it will provide more fuel for us to drive around and look for food.

-- Unknown

ah, ah, ah

That was very funny

__________________
______________________Own only what you can always carry with you: know languages, know countries, know people. Let your memory be your travel bag.”___________________Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Why would you be more free in a state of nature as in a state of culture.

Education makes free, as I see it.

__________________
______________________Own only what you can always carry with you: know languages, know countries, know people. Let your memory be your travel bag.”___________________Alexander Solzhenitsyn

I don't really know about the 'state of culture' - the only thing that could precede a 'state of culture' with respect to humans is when we were still hairy apes without language - before we were humans.

Education does not make us free. Education is designed to make us an efficient part of the industrial work force. That is not something that makes me feel free.

Andrew

__________________
Ethanol is a fabulous solution to our energy dilemma because it will provide more fuel for us to drive around and look for food.

-- Unknown

This is exactly what I meant. The tribal/hunter state you were refering to is in fact already a "state of culture"

Ok, so why are we talking to each other right now ? If I hadn't learnt English, which is part of the formal education I received, I wouldn't be able to exchange ideas with you on this forum. I wouldn't be in a position to see that there are other forms of thoughts than the one provided by my direct environment.

Obviously, my practice of the English language was also one of the reasons which lead to my employment in my present position - English allowed me to be part of the work force. However, it allows me a few other things that have nothing to do with being part of the work force like chatting with you on this forum.

And this is just one example. What is it with all this stuff I NEVER use at work and studied at the university - philosophy, literature, political sciences ...

__________________
______________________Own only what you can always carry with you: know languages, know countries, know people. Let your memory be your travel bag.”___________________Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Absolutely. Im wondering what separates the hunter/gatherer from us - homo-domesticus


Learning a language does not depend on formal institutionalized education. It requires immersing one self in a culture. I spent twelve years in a formal setting that was supposed to make me bilingual. To this day i am not bilingual becuase i was never immersed in any culture but an English speaking one, much to the chagrin of proud quebecois francophones.


Granted. But you did not learn the language just to have discourse on this forum, you learned the language primarily so you could buy food that is locked up, and if you live in a non-temperate climate, so you can heat or cool yourself.

I am no more in a state of freedom now (or lack thereof) than i was before i became "educated" in the humanities and liberal arts. It sure looks good on my resume though and it has certainly been helpful in me getting a job so i can by food and heat my home. But the topics i studied at university have nothing at all to do with my work, or my freedom.

Andrew

__________________
Ethanol is a fabulous solution to our energy dilemma because it will provide more fuel for us to drive around and look for food.

-- Unknown

The server serves for the freedom to pay in order to get served. The only one who doesn't serve for this freedom is the one who steals. While he's free to choose not to serve, he isn't free from the consequence of his choice and, in this particularly case, the consequence is a severe loss of freedom. All while the server maintains his freedom.

Would you say that we learned how to ultimately better control diseases before or after we learned the skill of domesticating animals? Did the human population explode before or after?

Sure. Not caring but carrying them around was the point. Now you merely pay someone to do that (cf. pay to get served). Same point with elders.

Food has never been free and abundant. As long as other organisms inhabit the same environment as you (and they better or you may not have any access to food to begin with), food is a scarce resource and therefore subject to competetion. And that includes the food that is you.

There are of course some things that can give an organism leverage in that competition. One is to engage in an adaptational arms race. A slow and costly method but, since that's what most organisms engage in, very effective. Another and even more effective method, however, is to seek to control the environment. That's a goal. A goal takes long term planning. Long term planning takes intelligence. And intelligence? Well, we can do that. Ploys"R"Us.

Only after having sought to control the environment for food have we not worked hard to feed ourselves. We are suddenly free to do all sorts of things. Such as, for example, but not limited to, learn how to control the environment to get even more freedom.

Andrew, I still see duration of life as a function of health. You may have this illusion of happy, meaningful, rewarding lives while it lasted. And you may want to define freedom according to such a vision. It's not uncommon. I just say that my dreams don't equate that vision with freedom.

Not having to serve but still being able to survive is freedom. The hunter/gatherer exemplifies this type of lifestyle.


I would say we just developed immunities over time as we continued to live in close quarters with animals.

The human population explosion only decreased our freedoms.


Having to pay someone to look after my young or elders forces me to work, which reduces my freedom.


Tell that to the hunter/gatherers in the amazon, tell that to the indians on the pacific coast who had no idea what to do with all their salmon, deer, and plant foods. These groups were literally surrounded by abundant free food.
Food only becomes scrace to the sedentary agriculturalists who dont move around to where the food is. Your image of a painful and predatory struggle for food is not accurate. Its very victorian and outdated, we have learned quite a bit over the decades since people were writing about the poor savages who lived in constant cold and hunger. That image is false. Alot of what contributed to that image was the disease spread by Europeans, which decimated their cultures and populations, and left later anthropologists with the impression that these people were always miserable...
Hunter/Gatherers sought to modify and improve the environment around them. Only when they became sedentary farmers and descended into the misery of labor, disease, and periodic famine did they decided they needed to control the environment. Unfortunately all they/we have done is destroy it. Whereas the hunter/gatherer just made improvements where it could and generally let things be.
You have it backwards in my view. By having to work to buy food that is locked up we have only decreased our freedom. The hunter/gatherer had far more free time than the modern industrial citizen, and they could simply walk over the next ridge to find more food when it did become scarce without trespassing on the 'property' of others. When they did have contact with others they typically opened up trade relations and went on their merry way. (essentially how the NA natives innocently and naively greeted the European invaders). In todays world there is no free land or food around me, all there is land owned by other people who would shoot me or have me arrested for being on 'their' land.

Here is your conception of freedom as i see it. A homeless man is hungry and cold. He breaks the law so that he gets put in a relatively warm jail cell where food is given to him. He has actually given up his freedom to eat and stay warm. This is how the city and nation state functions. We have all given up true genuine freedom by 'serving' in order to eat and stay warm, all the while convincing ourselves that we have actually gained something. Just like the homeless man in his prison cell believes he has gained something, but in reality he has given up his freedoms.

Duration of life is mostly just a function of technology, not health. I.e., my grandpa lived for twenty years in a bed with extreme Alzheimer's, having to be fed and kept alive by nurses. Surely that is not a unique story, and it does much to make our stats on longevity look attractive - deceptively.

The inuit of the arctic are a case in point. They have less longevity, but nutritionists refer to the inuit diet as the healthiest available for humans. Just recently they began consuming 'civilized' processed foods and voila, heart-disease and prostrate cancer has suddenly shown up in their culture with a vengeance where it was virtually non-existent in the past. Just wait till they get big fancy hospitals to treat their unhealthy habits and keep them alive longer and longer.... but in more and more discomfort. Longevity does not equal health. Longevity is mainly a result our vain and desperate attempt to 'live forever' while we treat our bodies like crap. Quality of life is more desirable than quantity of life.

But... i will note that our infant death rates are much much lower than any hunter gatherer group, which also effect longevity rates.

Andrew

__________________
Ethanol is a fabulous solution to our energy dilemma because it will provide more fuel for us to drive around and look for food.

-- Unknown