100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Individuality | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I think your original premiss is wrong: Take a sample of randomly selected twelve-or-over people form industrial societies, a sample from natural people, and throw them all in the wild, and I assert (but can't prove) that both groups will have survivors and non-survivors. Well I still stand by my belief that my original premise is right, based on what I’ve heard about primitive tribes that exist right now, who’s “right of passage” for young males is exactly that – to survive on their own for some extended length of time with no outside assistance. In such a society, very close to 100% of all males would be so capable. And I do not believe that the success rate, for young males of the same age (or any age, for that matter) from modern industrial societies would come anywhere near that percentage. All I’m really saying is that it is the norm in the most primitive of societies, whereas it is the exception in modern technological societies.
But I guess we’ll never know definitively either way. To me your retort is a shining support to my second point, that kids in primitive societies are comforming to their culture by learning the skills to survive. If the survival rate of kids or adults thrown into the wild was truly an individual effort, and not influenced by cultural knowledge, training and adherence to these, then you would not have made this argument successfully, ... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think your original premiss is wrong: Take a sample of randomly selected twelve-or-over people form industrial societies, a sample from natural people, and throw them all in the wild, and I assert (but can't prove) that both groups will have survivors and non-survivors. Well I still stand by my belief that my original premise is right, based on what I’ve heard about primitive tribes that exist right now, who’s “right of passage” for young males is exactly that – to survive on their own for some extended length of time with no outside assistance. In such a society, very close to 100% of all males would be so capable. And I do not believe that the success rate, for young males of the same age (or any age, for that matter) from modern industrial societies would come anywhere near that percentage. All I’m really saying is that it is the norm in the most primitive of societies, whereas it is the exception in modern technological societies.
But I guess we’ll never know definitively either way. To me your retort is a shining support to my second point, that kids in primitive societies are comforming to their culture by learning the skills to survive. If the survival rate of kids or adults thrown into the wild was truly an individual effort, and not influenced by cultural knowledge, training and adherence to these, then you would not have made this argument successfully, ... You're being difficult, Sky. What did I do or say? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think your original premiss is wrong: Take a sample of randomly selected twelve-or-over people form industrial societies, a sample from natural people, and throw them all in the wild, and I assert (but can't prove) that both groups will have survivors and non-survivors. Well I still stand by my belief that my original premise is right, based on what I’ve heard about primitive tribes that exist right now, who’s “right of passage” for young males is exactly that – to survive on their own for some extended length of time with no outside assistance. In such a society, very close to 100% of all males would be so capable. And I do not believe that the success rate, for young males of the same age (or any age, for that matter) from modern industrial societies would come anywhere near that percentage. All I’m really saying is that it is the norm in the most primitive of societies, whereas it is the exception in modern technological societies.
But I guess we’ll never know definitively either way. To me your retort is a shining support to my second point, that kids in primitive societies are comforming to their culture by learning the skills to survive. If the survival rate of kids or adults thrown into the wild was truly an individual effort, and not influenced by cultural knowledge, training and adherence to these, then you would not have made this argument successfully, ... |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Mon 09/21/09 11:26 PM
|
|
I think the whole point of existence is to manifest individuals from the one source of all things.
I don't think that becoming "One with God" is the ultimate spiritual goal or purpose. Why would it be? I don't think "going home to God" is the ultimate goal or purpose either. Growth. Expansion. Manifestation. Individuality. That is the purpose. |
|
|
|
|
