Are you independent?

Snakeblood · 14-09-2011 10:15AM

I think it should be noted that if Ray Mears was in a heavily industrialised city like Singapore, naked and unable to avail of universally available facilities or tv producers, I think he'd be pretty boned.

ash23 · 14-09-2011 10:15AM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I'm sure there are plenty of people who are independent. For a start there are people in tribes who would be independent then there are people in modern society who just have the skills to make their own clothes,shelter, food etc so they don't depend on other people but they do use other people's help.

I think if people did learn these skills they would become happier, more confident and more stressfree in life.

People in tribes wouldn't be totally independent. They are in tribes for a reason. There will always be the best hunter, the medicine man, the one who builds the best shelter, the chief etc.
That is why people (humans) form tribes. There aren't many who are totally independent as in, able to live alone and do everything for themselves.

Scanlas The 2nd · 14-09-2011 10:16AM

jester77 wrote: »

By applying the logic of the OP, then no, not until the day I can succeed in giving myself open heart surgery will I be independent

If you were to eat the diet of a hunter gatherer you wouldn't need open heart surgery, probably wouldn't need a dentist either.

Scanlas The 2nd · 14-09-2011 10:18AM

ash23 wrote: »

People in tribes wouldn't be totally independent. They are in tribes for a reason. There will always be the best hunter, the medicine man, the one who builds the best shelter, the chief etc.
That is why people (humans) form tribes. There aren't many who are totally independent as in, able to live alone and do everything for themselves.

I'd say there would still be the odd tribesperson who would be skilled enough in each area to get by though.

People say they are independent like it is a great accomplishment. There's not much to being "independent" in our society, we are basically big spoon fed babies, not that I have a problem with that.

NothingMan · 14-09-2011 10:22AM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

If you were to eat the diet of a hunter gatherer you wouldn't need open heart surgery, probably wouldn't need a dentist either.

They only lived til like 30 or so though. Independent maybe, but not the same kind of life or lifespan we enjoy.

14-09-2011 10:23AM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I'd say there would still be the odd tribesperson who would be skilled enough in each area to get by though.

So there's only ever been the odd tribesperson who's been fully independent.. And you told us a few posts back that you think we should learn these skills ourselves? Just change the definition of the word in your head.. It's a lot easier.

"Completely self sufficient" is doing everything yourself.
"Independent" is making your own way in the world.

Scanlas The 2nd · 14-09-2011 10:29AM

NothingMan wrote: »

They only lived til like 30 or so though. Independent maybe, but not the same kind of life or lifespan we enjoy.

More like 60 or 70. Hunter gatherers were far healthier than us and suffered less from disease in old age.

Scanlas The 2nd · 14-09-2011 10:31AM

Deleted User wrote: »

So there's only ever been the odd tribesperson who's been fully independent.. And you told us a few posts back that you think we should learn these skills ourselves? Just change the definition of the word in your head.. It's a lot easier.

"Completely self sufficient" is doing everything yourself.
"Independent" is making your own way in the world.

I don't think we should try to be completely indepedent, that would be madness and making life more difficult than it needs to be. I said learning some of these skills would be good for you.

Describe someone who doesn't make their own way in the world.

Son Of A Vidic · 14-09-2011 10:32AM

If ever a thread needed to be re-titled this is it. Maybe asking could we survive/what are our suvival skills like ect, might be more helpful?

Anyway I'm not good with the berry/plant identifying thing, but otherwise I'd do fine.

hondasam · 14-09-2011 11:06AM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I'm certainly not, if other people didn't help me I'd starve to death as I don't know how to hunt or prepare the animal after it is killed. I don't think I would know where to start looking to find some berries or fruit growing on trees. I'd have a look but how long will you live on berries and fruit. I can't fish either and I've no idea how to make clothes. I'd freeze to death. So in summary I am highly dependent and think those who claim to be "independent" are talking rubbish.

You ever hear about shops, plenty of berries and fruit there.

Logical Fallacy · 14-09-2011 11:17AM

NothingMan wrote: »

They only lived til like 30 or so though. Independent maybe, but not the same kind of life or lifespan we enjoy.

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

More like 60 or 70. Hunter gatherers were far healthier than us and suffered less from disease in old age.

The long lived hunter gathers lived to be about 60 or 70.

A huge percentage...about 50-60% of their kids didn't live past 15, and about 30 % of those 15 year olds wouldn't make it 45.

Richard Hillman · 14-09-2011 11:39AM

Bear Grylls taught me everything I know.

jonnny68 · 14-09-2011 11:46AM

Well i voted Independent in the last election if that counts:P (would do so again or vote for people before profit.)

Android 666 · 14-09-2011 11:51AM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

More like 60 or 70. Hunter gatherers were far healthier than us and suffered less from disease in old age.

Suffered less from old age I'd say, being that they were already dead.

I'd rather take my chances with me telly and me type 2 diabetes if it's all the same with you. Being a hunter gatherer must have been no craic at all...

Scanlas The 2nd · 14-09-2011 12:02PM

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

The long lived hunter gathers lived to be about 60 or 70.

A huge percentage...about 50-60% of their kids didn't live past 15, and about 30 % of those 15 year olds wouldn't make it 45.

Infant mortality was a lot higher but they suffered a lot less from cancer,alzheimers cardiovascular disease etc. I'd say broken bones and infection caused a lot of the early death but if they avoided such accidents and infant mortality they lived long lives. Just look at todays tribes, they are healthier and happier (don't suffer from depression I believe).

Android 666 · 14-09-2011 12:32PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Just look at todays tribes, they are healthier and happier (don't suffer from depression I believe).

But they have breasts like satchels, weird teeth and no box sets of the Wire.
Modern man 1. Ancient man 0

Also, what about operations we take for granted to fix club feet, cleft palates, heart murmurs and the like.

Scanlas The 2nd · 14-09-2011 12:36PM

Android 666 wrote: »

But they have breasts like satchels, weird teeth and no box sets of the Wire.
Modern man 1. Ancient man 0

Also, what about operations we take for granted to fix club feet, cleft palates, heart murmurs and the like.

let them die. Don't know what club feet are though.

revell · 14-09-2011 01:01PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I'm talking about not being dependent on other people. If you die without the help of other people I think you can safely you depend on them therefore you are independent.

I think it's a buzzword people like to call themselves to feel better but in reality it's a delusion.

Nonsense I ever heard for a year at least. If I pay my money to other people for cloth or food, are they helping me or I am helping them?

Android 666 · 14-09-2011 01:07PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

let them die.

Classy…

RedXIV · 14-09-2011 01:12PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Infant mortality was a lot higher but they suffered a lot less from cancer,alzheimers cardiovascular disease etc. I'd say broken bones and infection caused a lot of the early death but if they avoided such accidents and infant mortality they lived long lives. Just look at todays tribes, they are healthier and happier (don't suffer from depression I believe).

Your assuming here. just because they couldn't diagnose these diseases, it doesn't mean they didn't suffer from them

sock puppet · 14-09-2011 01:14PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Infant mortality was a lot higher but they suffered a lot less from cancer,alzheimers cardiovascular disease etc. I'd say broken bones and infection caused a lot of the early death but if they avoided such accidents and infant mortality they lived long lives. Just look at todays tribes, they are healthier and happier (don't suffer from depression I believe).

Also no one ever died in car crashes. This proves that people were safer drivers back then.

Scanlas The 2nd · 14-09-2011 01:19PM

sock puppet wrote: »

Also no one ever died in car crashes. This proves that people were safer drivers back then.

Today's hunter gatherers have been shown to suffer a lot less from those diseases.

Bannasidhe · 14-09-2011 01:21PM

Back on topic - let's see. Over the course of my nearly 50 years I have learned to:
Make wool from fleece.
Build and use a hand loom.
Sew.
Slaughter and butcher (from lobsters to cows

).
Ride a horse.
Sail.
Archery.
Fish.
Make mortar from lime, blood and horsehair.
Flint knapping (sadly no flint in south of Ireland, but were do have to 'trade').
Basic metal work - also know the theory of stone age copper mining.

I hope to NEVER have to use these skills in any meaningful way.

14-09-2011 01:23PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I'm certainly not, if other people didn't help me I'd starve to death as I don't know how to hunt or prepare the animal after it is killed. I don't think I would know where to start looking to find some berries or fruit growing on trees. I'd have a look but how long will you live on berries and fruit. I can't fish either and I've no idea how to make clothes. I'd freeze to death. So in summary I am highly dependent and think those who claim to be "independent" are talking rubbish.

NOW arent you sorry you didnt go into the beavers/Cubs/Scouts

I could get by. Certainly with fish and berries and probably with a certain level of hunting smaller things. Not so sure what level I am at in the whole making spears out of bits of tree to bring down a Deer but I could make a feisty effort at it at least.

I can certainly skin rabbits and given enough skins I could certainly fashion some form of clothing from it though it would likely not be all that visually appealing. Fire I can defintely make.

Wibbs · 14-09-2011 01:26PM

NothingMan wrote: »

They only lived til like 30 or so though. Independent maybe, but not the same kind of life or lifespan we enjoy.

Nope.

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

The long lived hunter gathers lived to be about 60 or 70.

A huge percentage...about 50-60% of their kids didn't live past 15, and about 30 % of those 15 year olds wouldn't make it 45.

Nope, not quite, not going by modern hunter gatherers. Yes they have a high infant mortality with far far more expiring before 15, but barring trauma if you reached 20, you had a very good chance of reaching 70. Women less so because of childbirth, but even there you would have been better off giving birth in a mud hut than in europe until victorian times.

RedXIV wrote: »

Your assuming here. just because they couldn't diagnose these diseases, it doesn't mean they didn't suffer from them

Going by the bones and modern HG types, they don't suffer from these first world diseases. Type 2 diabetes is virtually unknown. Dental problems ditto. They have far less dental disease than we do. No dental overcrowding either. Heart disease is very rare. Obesity as well. They have a wider ranged diet than the average civilised type. Oh we have access to a wide range, we just seem to avoid eating it. Depression levels are significantly lower as are cortisol levels in their blood. Becoming farmers freed us to build the modern wolrd around us, but we lost something in the mix. Archaeologists can tell the last hunters from the first farmers by a number of clues, one biggie being the farmers die younger, are shorter, more arthritic, have shíte teeth and are weaker.

sock puppet · 14-09-2011 01:28PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Today's hunter gatherers have been shown to suffer a lot less from those diseases.

I'm sure that they too rarely die in car crashes. It's amazing how with all our modern advancements we're still more dangerous drivers than these people.

Wibbs · 14-09-2011 01:33PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I could get by. Certainly with fish and berries and probably with a certain level of hunting smaller things. Not so sure what level I am at in the whole making spears out of bits of tree to bring down a Deer but I could make a feisty effort at it at least.

Easy enough. First you'd need wood working tools. If you're in an area with flint gameball, though obsidian is sharper. Much sharper than the sharpest surgical blade. Quite brittle though, so flint the way to go(you can shave with it so its sharp enough). then get a straight branch of the right length scrape off the bark and you can straighten it further over a fire. Then shape the point. Burn the point in the fire and that will toughen it right up, without needing to build flint points.

Or better yet find a game trail and set traps. Pitfall traps an easy one.

14-09-2011 01:35PM

Oh I know the theory. Just not sure how well I would put it all into practice. Life has consistently highlighted to me just how wide the gulf is between the two at times.

14-09-2011 01:52PM

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

skills to make their own clothes,shelter, food etc ...

I can sew, weave, cook, have basic foraging skills, and I'm generally handy with practical skills. I certainly wouldn't die immediately if stranded in a forest. But I'm completely dependent, I've never had more than a summer job and a student grant gets me through the college year. I still live in my parents house, eat their food and would be dead without them. Added to that, even though I could make my own clothes if I was suddenly in the middle of a forest naked, it would take me days to either source and weave long leaves/strips of bark or find materials to make a rudimentary yarn out of, and then I would still need to put it together and find ways to insulate it for more warmth. And at the end of all that I'd be dead because I didn't have any time to find food and water and used the sheeting I made for clothes instead of shelter. So while a person can have the skills to provide everything they need, there are barely enough hours in a day to do all these things yourself.

I think if people did learn these skills they would become happier, more confident and more stressfree in life.

Yeah it's really comforting that I could survive better than most in the wild when in the real world I'm completely dependent on being provided for. I've made myself a load of clothes over the summer and I can tell you it's more demoralising than anything else, because it's a reminder that I had no job to go to and nothing else to do with my day.

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Infant mortality was a lot higher but they suffered a lot less from cancer,alzheimers cardiovascular disease etc. I'd say broken bones and infection caused a lot of the early death but if they avoided such accidents and infant mortality they lived long lives. Just look at todays tribes, they are healthier and happier (don't suffer from depression I believe).

They suffered less from alzheimers and cardiovascular disease because people rarely lived long enough to be high risk. As for depression and cancer, I doubt these tribes have oncologists and psychiatrists to diagnose them.

Scanlas The 2nd · 14-09-2011 02:00PM

true-or-false wrote: »

They suffered less from alzheimers and cardiovascular disease because people rarely lived long enough to be high risk. As for depression and cancer, I doubt these tribes have oncologists and psychiatrists to diagnose them.

Given 100 elderly hunter gatherers and 100 elderly people living in modern society more of the latter suffer from those diseases and even have worse teeth.

Are you independent?

Comments