Values, Ethics, Aesthetics, and Principles

Main
#1

Though I’ve been thinking about it for a long time, I consider the Feralculture Values page to be incomplete and imprecise. After reading through the following posts by Lincoln J. Finch, I’m further convinced that more work is to be done. The following could be read sequentially, but I’m particularly interested in #4 and #5.

Wild Life

  1. Thoughts on Primitivism (or why I’m anti-civilization)
  2. Reasons for Hardline Primitivism, Part I
  3. Reasons for Hardline Primitivism, Part II
  4. A Wildist Ethic & Aesthetic
  5. The Six Wildist Distinctions

Excerpts from #4:

"...ethical principles, which are essentially anarchist:
  • Friendship —mutual aid, generalized reciprocity, society of kindred spirits —prima facie horizontality of values or commitments —see Todd May or Aristotle’s concept of friendship; it’s rare because it’s anti-political
  • Self-Defense
The following values are essentially primitivist:
  • Rewilding —restoration of authenticity & self-reliance, —play instead of work, work as play, lots of humor —ecological regeneration, healing, bushcraft, nomadism
  • Simplicity —im-mediacy (immediate return) & direct action —transparency, honesty between friends —let go of trying to control others —de-quantifying
  • Diversity

Excerpt from #5:

"With this in mind, as well as the fact that a continual process of learning about the following things would be a continual updating of them, wildism is… …Neo-luddite and against civilization, in the sense of isolationism, and in terms of what one wants to defend oneself and one’s community / land from. Yet they can very well be open skeptics, or what I call teal green futurists when it comes to compatibility of interest. Ears are perked about those seaweed tesla batteries and algae oil. I myself might support some social anarchists and some open source market anarchists, but I just think they’re mistaken or misguided on a number of things. So this is a philosophy of technology / society, whose conclusion is anti-political. …Anarchist by ethics, i.e. values, principles, pro-/pre-scriptions. And primitivist by aesthetics, i.e. taste. So rewilding, wildry, nomadism, foraging, bushcraft, etc is the intended practice, and feral anarchy the intended social result. …Cultural materialist by scientific theory, in terms of the relevant science here, cultural anthropology, for critique. But besides this it is the best response to the oracle of Delphi’s command, Know thyself. …Deep ecologist and phenomenologist, by thought (so perhaps one would strive to think in accord with the so called wilderness ontology, a concept made by Levi Bryant). Again, great for critique at a more metaphysical level, but for more than just that. What tweaks, improvements, and integrations might we undertake?

@autumnleavescascade @primalwar @dennis @glennh

#2

First the Wildernist, now wildism. Slow it down a notch kids.

#3

Oh don’t worry, Kevin, “The Wildernest” himself showed up to police the situation.

https://d2pi2smlbz33ig.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2015/03/wildernest-police.png

#4

I’m dead. I think that comment sums up Facebook for 2015.

#5

I can’t get enough of the fact that a dude calls his group “FC” and then tries to call his ideology “primitivism” but formally requested someone not use “wildism” because it’s too close to “wildernist”. The Revolution will be trademarked.

#6

It’s funny that you said that because just minutes ago I basically threw it in park. I’ve dropped ‘wildism’ because that wasn’t needed for what I was doing. And that is simply to show the constants and variables for making a worldview. Hey, I’ve got to do something with my education in philosophy! See the new version of the last blog.

#7

Wait, is the new “name” a sideways deep ecology symbol? The world is probably better off without philosophy degrees.

#8

The abandonment of philosophy and writing, eventually, yes.

But not of ‘philosophy,’ worldview, mythos, oral traditions of storytelling, Socratic dialogue, etc. Or are our definitions wildly different?

#9

Something missing from that Feralculture values page that I value, and I assume egalitarian bands value, is group conflict resolution and empathy. I can’t recall where, but I vaguely remember that when there’s a problem in the group it becomes EVERYONE’S problem and the group gets together to solve it together. I can’t say I know or want to mimic that behavior, but I do like how empathic and connected it seems. And realistic: I have experienced many groups go awry from small conflicts that became more and more…

#10

Another value (I guess this could go under “play”/fun): communal musical interaction/dancing. Like this: https://youtu.be/srNeyqcQ2cw

#11

Hahahaha “FeralCulture” is also an “FC”, this is getting really accidental Junior High.

1 Like
#12

Yeah, that FC thing didn’t even occur to me until someone (maybe @dennis?) mentioned it in a forum thread.

#13

Do you have any references for specific avenues we should look at? Non-violent communication and/or non-defensive communication seems to come up regularly.

#14

Agreed that we need to shine a light on empathy/kindness as a value. Goes hand in hand with a successfully applied consensus-based decision-making process. I read an amusing article a while back — it was called something like “Prepper or Anarcho-primitivist?” — and it pointed out that preppers are so damn nice to one another, supportive and helpful and inclusive, whereas AP ppl will always find something to argue about, generally with some measure of vitriol. Many reasons for the difference, but in my experience, it’s quite real.

So yeah, non-violent communication is a way of framing human interaction that I think would be really helpful for people here (anyone, really) to internalize. It takes a while to really absorb the approach, but it’s very powerful. This is a great 3-hr workshop by NVC founder, Marshall Rosenberg.

There’s a bunch of his other stuff on the yootoob; very eye-opening for those of us raised with a classic egocentric style.

@dennis perhaps you read about group conflict resolution in Peter Gray’s Free to Learn? He addressed this topic, and then went further, talking about how when things got particularly heated among adults, children in the group would band together and use gentle humor/mocking to diffuse the situation. NVC is rather humorless as an approach — it’s super-useful, but there’s something about the spirit of humor/play that really helps to advance things by putting everything in context.

#15

@hilaryb actually I was referring specifically to egalitarian band articles I’ve read (I sadly can’t recall which ones) but maybe Peter Gray is referencing the same stuff? I’ll have to read that book and find out.

Here’s what I’m talking about. Specifically see “intentional levelling”: Egalitarian Behavior and Reverse Dominance Hierarchy, Christopher Boehm http://intersci.ss.uci.edu/wiki/eBooks/Articles/Egalitarian%20Behavior%20Boehm.pdf

I’m definitely not talking about NVC as intentional levelling is not pacifist. Leaders who don’t follow are usually assassinated in egalitarian cultures. They aren’t dressed down with the fearsome NVC language of, “I see you giving more food to your relatives than to my family and they go hungry. I value sharing. I feel sad and angry my family is hungry. I am hungry. In the future I want you to share food with me. Thank you for hearing me.” They are dressed down with ridicule and humiliation. They are threatened with loss of power, excommunication, or even death. NVC and pacifism in general is a of no interest to me personally.

I do of course encourage and practice respectful communication among friendly folks. I do like that NVC stresses how people communicate may accuse people of doing something they didn’t intend or did not do. In other words, I like “I statements” to a degree. However, I’ve been in NVC-style conflicts where I had to drop the NVC because the person had power over me (a “landlord”) and refused to acknowledge their power and privilege. “Well I’m sorry you feel that way” [I’m just going to do what I want regardless of how you feel about it].

#16

Ah yes, I think we’re talking about several different issues @dennis.

  1. Intentional leveling in HG communities as used to keep ppl from getting too “big for their britches” — e.g. bragging after a successful hunt is met with group ridicule of how skinny/meager the spoils were. Gray talks about that stuff as well.

  2. Group conflict resolution (intentional leveling is a tactic to help with this in certain instances, but so are other consensus-based approaches)

  3. The need for a general ethos of kindness/empathy/generosity of spirit, where I think NVC can help modern-day folks reframe a lot of bad interpersonal skillz, and stop making destructive ad hominem “you statements.” Agreed that all parties involved should be “friendly” and motivated to get along, in order for this approach to work!

#17

I think knowing when to stop the friendliness to me is key. That’s where the “empathy”/tracking comes in. Much like you may track for signs of animals and “become the animal” in order to find it, I think empathy/tracking helps to see the underlying dynamics of communication and know when to keep the mutual aid/respect going and when to drop into “intentional levelling”. Some consensus groups have a “vibes watcher” to keep an eye on dynamics in meetings. I wonder if people in egalitarian bands all have to become “vibes watchers.”

I also imagine “dropping” the conflict and restarting the friendliness is key as well. Once the issue is resolved there is no further revenge/defensiveness/grudges.