/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.18506501]

Is body mutilation a surrogate activity? Why do african tribes do it? I wouldn't like to be forced by my tribe to cut a hole in my ears or penis

[Anonymous No.18506512]

>>18506501
>surrogate activity bad
why?
>it's bad, because you know its not natur-- its uh you know-- look its just is BAD OKAY? trust me bro

[Anonymous No.18506517]

>>18506501
>Is body mutilation a surrogate activity?
I don't know what that means.
>Why do african tribes do it? I wouldn't like to be forced by my tribe to cut a hole in my ears or penis
Usually a few factors. Sometimes there's religious motivation, and believing a facially stupid act is divinely inspired makes it seem less stupid. Signalling in-group membership can be important. Finally, and in my opinion most importantly, people who have been subject to ritual mutilation often encourage or force their children to undergo it because to do otherwise would be tantamount to admitting that the parent's own mutilation was unnecessary, which can be psychologically distressing.

[Anonymous No.18507663]

>>18506501
That's not what surrogate activity means.

[Anonymous No.18507870]

>>18506512
There's nothing wrong with surrogate activities, just like there's nothing wrong with being a slave. Specially for people like you

[Anonymous No.18508007]

>>18506501
I'm not sure. In Technics and Human Development, Mumford talks about how some of the very oldest metalworking remains are small rings and filaments which appear designed for ear-widening and body modification for ritual. It'd seem these are older than what we consider practical functions. Kaczynski stops making sense around this level of granularity because he places survival before mythmaking.

[Anonymous No.18508172]

>>18508007
This is a good argument, but according to Ted's definition of surrogate activities:

>Given a person who devotes much time and energy to the pursuit of goal X, ask yourself this: If he had to devote most of his time and energy to satisfying his biological needs, and if that effort required him to use his physical and mental faculties in a varied and interesting way, would he feel seriously deprived because he did not attain goal X? If the answer is no, then the person’s pursuit of goal X is a surrogate activity.

Any activity based on a tribe's religion, myths or artistic endeavors wouldn't qualify as a surrogate activity, since they are

>devoting most of their time and energy to satisfying their biological needs
and
>that effort requires them to use their physical and mental faculties in a varied and interesting way

Yet they would still feel seriously deprived if they did not attain the goal of said activity

[Anonymous No.18508193]

>>18508172
What do you mean when you say a tribe's artistic endeavours are devoting most of their time to satisfying biological needs?

[Anonymous No.18508196]

>>18506501
>Why do african tribes do it?
To identify each other and solidify the group

[Anonymous No.18508222]

>>18506501
did you a circumcision ?

[Anonymous No.18508238]

Probably for identification purposes. If your tribe identifies its members by making them wear red sandals, rivals can make some red sandals and infiltrate you. If your identifier is painful facial scars or long-term lip stretching they can't disguise themselves so easily.
This is stated in the Bible as the reason for circumcision. Presumably men didn't wear pants at that time, so Jews could recognize each other this way.

[Anonymous No.18508293]

>>18508193
Surrogate activities only make sense in a context. If I, as a member of a primitive tribe, spend most of my time trying to survive and fulfill my biological needs, yet at the end of the day I want to paint in a cave or make an offering to a god, then that activity wouldn't be considered a surrogate activity because I would feel deprived if I didn't do it. Ted's idea of the primitive man is not as pragmatic as one would think, it's not that tribe members didn't waste their time, but if they did it was something extremely important to them.

The same activity of painting could become a surrogate activity if I lived in a first world country and lived off of food stamps, because it wouldn't have any sort of deeply spiritual meaning to me, it would just be something to entertain myself. It's uncertain that I'd do the same thing if I had to survive in a natural setting.

[Anonymous No.18508324]

>>18508293
>The same activity of painting could become a surrogate activity if I lived in a first world country and lived off of food stamps, because it wouldn't have any sort of deeply spiritual meaning to me, it would just be something to entertain myself
This is not necessarily true, and it likewise not always the case that the art of primitive peoples has spiritual significance

[Anonymous No.18508337]

>>18508324
>it likewise not always the case that the art of primitive peoples has spiritual significance
How could you possibly know that
>>18508293
Whence this presumption that the latter case would have no spiritual meaning?

[Anonymous No.18508349]

>>18508337
>How could you possibly know that
How could you assert the contrary?

[Anonymous No.18508358]

>>18508349
Because things exist for reasons & not for no-reason

[Anonymous No.18508372]

>>18508358
>Because things exist for reasons & not for no-reason
Existing for a reason and existing for a spiritual reason are not identical

[Anonymous No.18508377]

>>18508358
But then how can you say that the art of modern people lacks spiritual significance?

[Anonymous No.18508389]

>>18508372
Reason and spirit are the same thing
>>18508377
I said that?

[Anonymous No.18508408]

>>18508389
>Reason and spirit are the same thing
Oh you're retarded. Ok, carry on then

[Anonymous No.18508410]

>>18508408
Newtonian sleep detected

[Anonymous No.18508412]

>>18508389
>Reason and spirit are the same thing

Shut the fuck up hegelian. Nobody believes your bullshit

[Anonymous No.18508420]

>>18508412
There's still time, anon

[Anonymous No.18508480]

>>18508420
Humans are not and will never be free in the way that Hegel believes. It's a denialist fantasy.

[Anonymous No.18508499]

>>18508324
I know it's not necessarily true, hence the "could" at the beginning of the sentence, I was just making an example to illustrate my point. Still, even if painting in my spare time fulfilled the requisite to become a surrogate activity(to feel deprived in the case of not doing it i.e. having a deep spiritual value,) it wouldn't fulfill the perquisites(I wouldn't have to devote most of my time and energy to satisfying my biological needs and that effort wouldn't require me to use my physical and mental faculties in a varied and interesting way.) That’s why surrogate activities can only exist in a context.

>>18508337
>Whence this presumption that the latter case would have no spiritual meaning?
I'm not aware of a single piece of primitive art that we don't believe had strong spiritual significance.

[Anonymous No.18508505]

>>18508480
>will never
The lowest possible form of perception, complete subjection before a dead world of inexorable instrumentality. There's still time to change your mind, anon.
>>18508499
Yeah, I'm talking about the latter case where I'm on foodstamps etc not primitive art

[Anonymous No.18508518]

>>18508505
>The lowest possible form of perception, complete subjection before a dead world of inexorable instrumentality. There's still time to change your mind, anon.
You are terrified of Nature and transcendent fantasies are your coping mechanism

[Anonymous No.18508537]

>>18508518
I love nature and reconcile with it by recognizing the action of spirit & rationality acting within it - you want a dull round of a universe powered by blood

[Anonymous No.18508544]

>>18508499
>I'm not aware of a single piece of primitive art that we don't believe had strong spiritual significance.
How the fuck do you justify such a wild presumption about the "spiritual significance" of e.g. animal cave paintings?

[Anonymous No.18508549]

>>18508537
Oh my god shut the fuck up you insufferable bitch. Blow your spirit out your ass

[Anonymous No.18508558]

>>18508549
Quite a "surrogate activity" we've found ourselves in huh

[Anonymous No.18508580]

>>18508537
>I love nature and reconcile with it by recognizing the action of spirit & rationality acting within it
You reduce nature to rationality because it renders nature intelligible. That's the cope. I don't believe in a universe of dull mechanics.

[Anonymous No.18508591]

>>18508580
So what else can you tell me about your "Nature"

[Anonymous No.18508648]

>>18508505
My bad, As I said, I just wanted to illustrate my point. It could have spiritual significance, but even if it had it wouldn't be a surrogate activity.

I think that in a techno-industrial society spiritual activities/beliefs can't possibly exist, since they require struggle and deep connection with nature. This has nothing to do with Ted's ideas though.

>>18508544
With primitive art made thousands of years ago we can't really know, although that's what most anthropologists state. With current primitive tribes we do know that, so that seems to be the case for tribes that lived thousands of years ago as well.

[Anonymous No.18508677]

>>18508648
It does though, because Ted explicitly rules out a reconfiguration of society to beget satisfying surrogate activities, but evidently this is false if man as a creative being comes to consciousness of himself as an artist, eg, a spiritual man

[Anonymous No.18508731]

>>18508677
The definition of a surrogate activity necessarily implies it being done in a primitive setting because of what I said in >>18508172 and
>>18508293. Men being or not being spiritual has nothing to do with it.