The philosophies of prehistoric primitive cultures?

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

Firstly, let me define the term ‘philosophy’ as I will be using it below: It is all encompassing as to a person/group/culture’s ideas, opinions, views, goals, understanding of the world and even to some extent one’s propensity to make the various pragmatic choices they make in life.

With that said my philosophy isn’t working for me and so I believe I must change it almost entirely. In my pursuit of solving that problem the initial solution seems to be to look back to primitive cultures.

Let me give some background as to why I believe that is the best initial solution before going on:

One may suggest that I study vastly different ideas and cultures than I’m used to.

Cultural anthropologists say that all modern cultures are ‘equal’ in there development. I’ll take that as a given. In my opinion though, all the philosophies of the various cultures can be reduced to the same thing with enough effort and I believe, with what cultures’ philosophies I am familiar with, that I have already done that in ‘my own mind’ (explaining to others such reductions is another story).

I don’t necessarily wish to start an argument as to what degree the philosophies of modern cultures differ. I know they differ greatly in a sense, I’m only speaking to the pragmatic differences as applied to my problem.

One may suggest that to change one’s entire philosophy apparently all one has to do is study the concepts revolving around each aspect of it until another perspective takes hold. So it may seem as if it would be a simple, though long, process to solve my problem. But, I think it can hardly be that simple.

My philosophy is taken as a whole and as I change one aspect of it the other aspects seem to shift to mitigate the effects of the change.

So it seems I must study a culture that is not equal to mine, one that is primitive. Because with the understanding of that primitive culture I can become more aware of the traces of my current philosophy and that could almost be a form of a ‘reset button’, being that as I initially try to equate the primitive philosophy to my own I will temporarily make my own philosophy more primitive.

I realize studying history in general as in the significantly recorded and analyzed history of the Eastern and Western worlds of the last three thousand years (more or less) is very useful in understanding where one’s philosophy comes from. But, if at each stage of history the culture in question is equal in the sense I spoke of earlier then it is of little use to solving my problem.

So back to my initial solution:

So what I wish to learn, that is why I wrote this thread, is to question others as to if there may be recorded history of cultures that are actually ‘anthropologically’ defined as primitive. And in doing that to see if my predicted solution is of value.

I realize that there are supposedly cave paintings from Neanderthals if nothing else. But, the more significant aspect of my question to others is whether old records of primitive history can be traced in a progression to modern philosophy and so in that the interpretation of the primitive philosophy won’t be a risk of being without foundation. (Obviously in the case of the cave paintings there is likely a 20,000 plus year gap so while there use may be of some value it is likely much more limited.)

(I would also like to know if anything I said makes sense and perhaps simply discuss my premise for the solution to my problem rather than how realistic it is.)

2

There’s a problem, right there.

All modern organisms are equally developed - that is to say, have adapted to live successfully in the modern world. That doesn’t mean that all animals are equal. Lions are better at catching and eating zebras than sea turtles. If you want to say not so, some animals are more complex, have changed more from their ancestors, then the same is true of cultures.

So rather than dismiss all other cultures and philosophies as being merely equal and hence unworthy of study just because some academics within a specific field have claimed that to be so, don’t take things as a given. Taking things as given because someone says so is the antithesis of philosophy.

If you have a problem with your philosophy, then you expect more from it. You have values and parameters it needs to meet. Don’t be afraid of your own values.

As far as primitive philosophies: the main reason we (in the West) start with the Greeks is that they were among the first to record their thoughts with written language. Much older than that and you’re mostly looking at book-keeping, dynastic records and mythological narrative.

3

“Primitive” cultures, almost by definition, don’t leave any written records because the invention of writing is the chief way of defining whether any given culture is “civilised” or not. With writing tends to come a number of other associated traits, such as the forming of large settlements called cities (which are only tiny villages by our standards, though).

All is not lost, however. I’ll use as an example what I know best, the Neolithic and Bronze Age culture of the British Isles, which has left us many hundreds, possibly thousands, of monuments in the form of stone circles, henges, passage graves, standing stones and other landscape features. A sophisticated, egalitarian culture, no writing is known from this period (in fact it predated any known writing from anywhere), but a symbolic picture system is known, consisting of spirals and other devices, which must have held meaning.

From their monuments we can learn a great deal of the thought processes of these people, their emphasis on the cycles of nature and the heavens, and their way of life. I don’t know if this would be classed as a philosophy in the modern sense, but it is certainly a way of looking at and understanding the world.

4

I was actually just trying to be polite by taking that as a given. I thought it was accepted by an overwhelming majority that all modern cultures are equally developed. It certainly leads to less divisiveness to make that assertion, but I’m inclined to agree with your logic as to why it isn’t so.

But, even taking it as a given that some modern cultures are drastically inferior to others it still doesn’t immediately solve the problem. If one were to find an isolated culture that is ridiculously simplistic in there philosophy/mythology and even language it wouldn’t help me with what I called the ‘resetting’ of my philosophy. That is because an anthropologist or anyone from outside of that culture can never entirely ‘get into’ it, that is understand that culture in a way that would be anything other than speculation from their own respective cultural/philosophical standpoint.

What I need is a progression from a simple culture to an advanced. If the simple culture is still alive (separate of course from the one that advanced out of it) then all the better, but there still needs to be a record of the advanced cultures progression from it, otherwise I would be just as well trying to imitate animals (or even plant life) in my ‘quest’ to temporarily get outside of my philosophy to a lower one.

I have to admit that I do have a dissatisfaction with my philosophy because of my values and furthermore you’re right in that my philosophy hasn’t met those values, values which I do fear very much. But, let’s say my philosophy did manage to meet them, to become completely compatible with those values, I still wouldn’t necessarily know what I need to do to fill full the expectation which those values impose. But, even assuming I would actually then know what to do, the problem still lies in that I simply cannot seem to manage to find or convince myself of a philosophy that meets my values.

‘Resetting’ as I vaguely expressed it, would have a chance of leaving me with values that can be compatible with whatever new philosophy I would obtain.

I realize that. But, mythological narrative may be enough, after all it seems that many philosophers agree that philosophy is very intertwined within mythology.

5

Personally I would readily classify all that as philosophy, after all I’m using the word in the broadest sense.

Would you say that those old cultures are primitive or simply different than our own?

6

I would say they are more primitive than us in some ways but more sophisticated in others.

7

But, do you believe that it most likely evens out and if so do you disagree with O_H’s assertion that modern cultures are not all equal?

8

I don’t think it necessarily evens out, and that all modern cultures are equal. There are places in the world I certainly wouldn’t want to live, or even visit.

9

While I’m very partial to where I live I think I would be willing to visit any place assuming I was welcome.

10

It’s that last part that’s important.

11

‘Reset’ by reading about a specific philosophical system and adopting it in your daily life. Try it on for size and see if it fits.

For example, research the major Epicurean texts and in your interactions ask yourself - What would Epicurus do or say? And do it or say it.

Then evaluate : Do you feel stronger? Uncomfortable? More/less successful?

Why the ancient Greeks and not some primitive culture? Because the Greeks wrote extensively and covered issues which are still relevant. You are unlikely to find sufficient information about primitive philosophy.

12

Hi Phyllo,

Perhaps I really do need to study Epicurus before commenting on him, but from what I do know it doesn’t seem as if his philosophy is that different from that of many others I hear of in modern society, even from those who may have never heard of him.

I do notice that when I read works or people’s views that say that thinkers are of the most value I do feel more successful, because thinking is nearly all I’ve ever done. That opinion or philosophy seems groundless to me though. To me being a thinker, by impulse more than choice, my whole life, I have to say it’s an unpleasant way to live and success can hardly be an attribute of it. For example, so I thought over dozens of philosophical issues for hundreds of hours each over the years, what do I have to show for it I may ask. I know my mind, and I know that it isn’t much of what I want. And then thinking isn’t the same as speaking to others. In the latter one learns to be understood by others, I have the greatest difficulty in being understood.

But, nonetheless with all the people or philosophies out there that essentially say that in almost every aspect of myself I’m either unsuccessful or, ironically, undeserving because of falsely perceived advantages I supposedly had, it is comforting to take hold of a philosophy that does actually ‘uplift me’. But, can I really expect to hold on to such an ephemeral narcissistic philosophy and even if I could, should I?

13

Epicurus is just an example.

I really sounds like you want to experience a different culture on more than an intellectual level. You want to do rather than think. Generally, you have to travel to get that kind of experience. Staying at home, you could possibly immerse in a local culture. For example, you might take part in a Japanese tea ceremony, sign up for Japanese martial arts classes or calligraphy classes.

14

The problem is that I’m anti-social. Not only can I not get along well enough with people of other cultures, not to mention of my own, to study them, it would be of no use. The mind of the extrovert is to foreign to me. I must first understand the development of the mind as seen in other anti-social people through the ages and of different cultures, before I can approach an understanding of the social. But, while anti-social people of all cultures have differences and similarities, even if those differences were significant their is axiomatically no way to directly study the various cultures as represented by the anti-social. In fact if I was social, then I wouldn’t be having these problems in the first place.

15

You’re pulling my leg. :smiley:

You want to ‘first understand’ - think about and analyze.

But you find that thinking is unpleasant and does not bring success.

Stop thinking! Start experiencing!

16

Pulling your leg about what exactly? I’ve been extremely introverted 90% of my life, and while the path I’m trying to describe/discover may be convoluted, I am sincere in my confusion.

Well yes, I’ve taken that about as far as it can take me, and I mean that literally though I’ll spare you the details, my issue is about finding the right material to read.

I’m trying.

17

Go study plants and insects. I mean really observe and note. Where they begin how they live, their ecosystems. Compare. How are plants and insects similar and why? Start at these lowest natural societies. You will stumble onto some good natural philosophies.

18

There are a lot of problems here. You are starting with an impossible aim. The point about being “prehistoric” is that nothing was written down in those times, so that all reflexions on their “philosophies” are speculative.
So, no you can absolutely NOT 'trace old records of primitive history to modern philosophy", people are doing EXACTLY to opposite - going from the written known to the unknown past.
As you can see from Maia’s response, much of prehistory has been invaded by the “I wish”, society could be X. The facts do not point to “powerful egalitarian society” making monuments. Monument building is most often a response to the formation of hierarchies. And the Neolithic culture had to ensure that one class worked in the land whilst the priest/kings collected and stored food, whilst controlling the seasonal information, with those monuments with their own brand of mumbo jumbo.
You also have a problem with “primitive”. What exactly do you mean by this word. It is used very sparingly these days by anthropologists, and seldom indeed by archaeologists.
Then you seem to have a basic problem with ignorance. You seem not to have any idea about the basic facts of human evolution.
There ARE NO Neanderthal cave paintings.

19

I suppose you thought I meant that while they’re all considered equal, some are considered more equal than others.

20

That’s not bad advice and I have been trying to go outside more lately.