BigTex


Folks who like Daniel Quinn's stuff may also like

http://anthropik.com/

which I've been linking to a lot lately.

The best thing I have taken from Daniel Quinn are the Ten Laws of Nature. Those are the true ten commandments not that bible thumper crap. Those Ten Laws of Nature were set long before humans existed and will stand long after the human race is extinct.

Do not steal, do not murder, do not commit adultery...

Yeah man, total crap. Be proud of being so enlightened.

And what story is Quinn enacting ? That of Guru of tribalism ?

Ever wonder why he seems to like having a following of adulating fans ?

Ever wonder why he twists anthropological data out of any semblance with reality ?

Ever wonder why he has nothing practicable to recommend, except for vaguely advocating that we let others starve in far off lands ?

Did you ever consider how many billions will have to die in order for the few remaining millions to subsist as neo-tribalists ?

But I forgot, murder is one those false "sins" of the crappy ten commandments.

Neither new nor original. This interpretation goes back centuries, and has been common in academic studies of Genesis at least since the early 1800s (conflict between pastoralists and civilization etc).

btu, original thought is all but impossible for the most part. what quinn has done is synthesize and collect quite a bit of theory and knowledge and put it into an easily accessible format that can surely strike the interest of those who follow that path.
i myself, upon picking up the book ishmael many years ago, sat down on a bench outside the bookstore and proceeded to read the entire book in a matter of four hours or so. i would count that night in general and all that followed as a peak experience ( in Maslow's terminology).
i do happen to love it when i see a "friend of ishmael" bumper sticker.

Cheers!

Here is one original thought for you.

Quinn displays all the signs of a narcissistic and self-absorbed individual.

The peak experience you had while reading his book is also known as the "narcissistic sweep".

My point is proven.

Your point being that you are blind ?

Wow, way to mischaracterize an author!

Does he? I haven't seen evidence of him "liking" it, he seems very frustrated by his "fans," who often misinterpret his work. If anything, he barely tolerates his "fans."




For instance?




What do you mean - he wrote an entire book about what to do, not to mention answered many questions about what to do.

http://www.ishmael.org/ToDo/WhatToDo.cfm





And bearing false witness is a sin of the Ten Commandments given by God.


Don't LIE about another person.


I don't know for a fact, but I'm guessing you have never met or talked with him.

btu, I just got the book and haven't had a chance to read it yet.

Don't spoil it for me.

If he really didn't want the groupies then he would tell them so in very clear terms. He does not.

Quite clearly he is allowing if not encouraging the transformation of his ideas into an ideology for a socio-political movement. These being radical and sweeping ideas (the blaming of civilization itself), the impact of such a political movement, whose consequences he cannot predict, could be nothing short of devastating.

There are many people who managed to stop the groupie phenomenon simply by making themselves inaccessible for such people (e.g. J. Krishnamurti), and by explicitly telling them that they disagree with their adulation, which they find pernicious for the adulators themselves.

It is quite clear that there is a movement built around his books and personality, which he does not clearly discourage.
There also seems to be a sort of cult around his ideology, as evidenced by some remarks in this thread. This is a dangerous phenomenon which he has an ethical obligation to speak up against and strongly discourage.




For instance the sweeping claims about human tribal life and civilization, and about ethics as well.



I am talking about practicable. How do you feed a massive population with a tribal social organization ?



Yes, and the idea that this model of social organization can feed a massive population is a dangerous fantasy. An extraordinary level of human life loss would be required by the social transformation which he has in mind. Deconstructing civilization itself would have severe consequences.



Well it's funny that you call me a liar. Just because you are in love with Quinn's ideology it doesn't mean that what he advocates wouldn't lead to the demise of billions.

Don't behave like a propagandist for someone else's ideas and someone else's personality. That is unusual to say the least.

btu2012,
Maybe you've missed something during your research. It is inevitable that billions will die. Whether from PO collapse, food production collapse, disease, comet, volcano etc etc. Humans have far surpassed a sustainable population for this planet. Many of us will die. Deal with it.

You have a choice of whether you accept this as inevitable and wish to accelerate it, or you want to avoid it and work against it happening.

That choice belongs to you only, and you should not equivocate about it or about the ethical character of your decision. Deal with it.

You might wish to re-read "The Plague".