primitivism

http://www.primitivism.com/primitivist-critique.htm

I apologize to No1 if I gave the impression that I was not interested in a serious discussion about the contents of this article. I find the whole thing to be interesting and I thought I was making honest observations about what was written here.

Anyway, the thread that this was previously part of has wandered hopelessly away from the OP so it's a good time to start a new thread.

I read the intro so far. Looks interesting.

there's something interesting about the various "ascetic" or "primitivist" movements that have occurred over the centuries -- they're a direct challenge to the assumption that the road to happiness involves acquiring more "stuff" (and often running up huge amounts of debt in the process).

I know there's been psychological studies that show that once a certain minimum living standard is attained, when people get a bigger car or a bigger house or make more money, they don't really become any happier than they were before. The primitivist is intuitively aware of this and asks the question - if I got a smaller car or a smaller house, would I be any less happy, and might I actually be more happy? -- indeed, how much of this stuff do I REALLY need at all? - and argues that the road to happiness actually involves giving up a lot of the "stuff" you think you "need".

Unless drastic steps are taken, in fifty years the vast majority of the world's population will likely be existing in conditions such that the lifestyle of virtually any undisturbed primitive tribe would be paradise by comparison.

🙄

Sorry. I can't take him seriously after that.

Originally posted by sh76
Unless drastic steps are taken, in fifty years the vast majority of the world's population will likely be existing in conditions such that the lifestyle of virtually any undisturbed primitive tribe would be paradise by comparison.

🙄

Sorry. I can't take him seriously after that.

It does seem like Thomas Malthus has been reborn in every succeeding generation, and each time he ends up being quite the laughingstock.

On the other hand, we do not have an infinite amount of natural resources, and the global population grows at an exponential rate. At some point, something has to give.

Will it be 50 yrs from now? - 150 yrs? - 500 yrs? - more than that? --- can technology continue to postpone the day of reckoning? -- or will Cassandra finally have her day?