Comment by esd_g0d | Hacker News Reader

Comment by esd_g0d | Hacker News Reader

Yeah. I find this romanticization of the past, this search for the "true" or "natural" way of doing things... I've seen it done for things other than childhood, like relationships in general, physical activity, diet* (does the paleo diet apply here? I know nothing but the name)... I think we do this because society and the typical human life is changing really fast, which prompts us to consider different ways of doing things, and wonder what would be the best. It's kinda disappointing at first that there are no clear answers in the past... but maybe at least we should be reassured because it means that our chances of doing it the "wrong" way today aren't that high.

Along those lines... the other day there was that discussion about the play-based childhood from decades ago, and I feel sometimes people were romanticizing it -- I don't think the increased rate of physical bullying and pressure for fitting in were mentioned enough (though there were some mentions). Personally, I think I'd rather not have been born in the 60s. The Internet is directly or indirectly responsible for like 99% of my knowledge (speaking English included), which in turn is responsible for so much in my life that's different and better... If I look back to the folks my age in my home town (which I think I'd never have left), I don't desire their life AT ALL.

* Unlike for behaviors and social conventions, I don't think we have so much freedom with things like diets. Humans do have some hard dietary needs...

One of the memes the Enlightenment established is the idea of the "noble savage". If you want to learn more about it, that's the search term for it. For instance, Wikipedia pops something up that is a decent introduction: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_savage

I find the memeset quite dehumanizing. "Savages", even putting aside the baggage that term carries, are as fully human as the "civilized", and as such, are as fully capable of the heights of humanity and the full plumbing of the depths.

While I admit I have not seen the movie the author is talking about, it sounds to me like it reeks of the "noble savage" memeset. I'm sure there are wonderful parents in the more primitive cultures (I think I can use that terminology in this context, it just refers to their technology usage and not humanity), but the primitive cultures also used to let unwanted children die by exposure... and there was worse, too. Because they're human, and as such, as prone to the heights and the depths as the rest of us. The modern "civilized" world has all the heights and the depths too; the civilized world is just somewhat better at hiding the depths where other people won't see it.

(Anyone who wants to complain about the terminology for "noble savage" is invited to take it up with the rest of the world; I'm just using the common name given to it. If it is not clear, I am dripping with contempt for the meme and have no interest in defending it in any form, name included.)

Yeah, it’s pretty common. You can recognize supporters by:

- A call to return to a primarily agrarian culture.

- A claim that prehistoric humans were somehow in more harmony with nature and their community.

- Focus on small, tribe like communities.

- Avoidance or downplay of any modern advantages like medicine or logistics.

Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater though

While some may - as this thread make out - fall for that archetypal trope; some of those elements are indeed worth studying

For example, scientists don’t place a huge effort on documenting the peoples of Papua New Guinea for some weird Exoticism. They genuinely provide unbridled access to effectively untouched (from western influence) and highly diverse groups. This access in turn is breeding ground for anthropologic, historic and psychological theory development and empirical studies

Don’t fall into the trap of immediately disregarding genuine areas of research due to previous experience with these “noble savage” admirers

To go further with this example: western doctors and researchers immediately began to force PNG groups to stop their burial rites after finally discovering Kuru (deadly prion disease) was being caused by some of their rites (consumption of brain tissue after death)

You can both be an advocate for smaller cultures in undeveloped areas without fetishising it and still support modern medicine, science and logistics

I'm not saying don't study nonindustrial groups of people. I agree there is real value in that. But the noble savage is definitely a romanticization of these cultures by industrialized societies.

We tried raising a generation of babies without breastmilk and discovered that doing so causes weak digestive tracts. We have a huge problem with obesity, largely due to highly processed foods that are optimized for profits. We have a mental health crisis that is likely linked to social media etc.

The reality is that nobody wants to completely go back to the past. Nobody is protesting the use of soap or brushing their teeth.

The real question is in which areas do we reject modern technology? We should evaluate modern technology not as fanboys but as mature humans. People think that the Amish are hypocrites because they use diesel generators instead of bringing electricity into their homes. But their relationship with technology is mature: they decide as a community which tech to use and which to avoid, instead of being fanboys who think the only thing better than tech is more of it.

I personally don't make the same tradeoffs the Amish do. But I do make tradeoffs. Saying that modern tech is universally good is just as chronologically snobbish as saying that the olden days were universally good.

I am not claiming industrialization is universally good. Just that it is not universally bad.

And progress isn't a straight line. You can reject parts without rejecting the whole.

Surely the romanticization happens with people who were on the receiving end of the change. Not kids from poor towns in 3rd world - they definitely have benefitted. But those who already had it all - and now have to share it with everyone.

It's not "sharing" if it's forced.

Don't leave us hanging, my man, tell me what has been forced!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com