Page 1 of 2
#1
Saw an article about a photographer taking photos of the worlds most remote tribes but soon they will have died out and be incorporated into global society.



Do you think the loss of tribal societies of humans like these is a shame, like losing an endangered species like a rare rhino or tiger or bird, or is it just progress that they will eventually be incorporated into the larger world and lose their "primitive" culture?

longing rusted furnace daybreak seventeen benign nine homecoming one freight car
#3
If they wanna join the party, I don't see the problem. They shouldn't be beholden to some old dead dudes who dressed the same way as them.
#4
Oh look, globalisation killing off yet another culture. When will we learn
Eat your pheasant
Drink your wine
Your days are numbered, bourgeois swine!
#5
McDonalds will save them.
Most of the important things


in the world have been accomplished


by people who have kept on


trying when there seemed to be no hope at all
#6
I mean, it's their culture and their's alone. They can do whatever they want with it. They have more use learning from us than we do from them anyways.
Though I'm open to reasoning why it would be considered a waste.
Quote by snipelfritz
You lost me at "Lubricate."

I'm raw, like nature. Nature boy. Big jungle leaves are my cum rags.

Sometimes I fuck a bamboo shoot.


There's nothing left here to be saved
Just barreling dogs and barking trains
Another year lost to the blue line
#7
I'll be honest, as daft as that getup is, it's still better than a Starbucks uniform.
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#8
"remote" my arse. They've clearly been to a shop for yellow face paint
#9
It's their culture, we've no place deciding what they should do with it.
OBEY THE MIGHTY SHITKICKER
#10
well theres that one on the island that attack anyone that comes on the island so good luck integrating them
dirtbag ballet by the bins down the alley
as i walk through the chalet of the shadow of death
everything that you've come to expect


#11
While there are some past cultures that I've felt it's a shame have/will have been lost, I think Ali's old "document it and move on" rubric is a good one.

I am however somewhat concerned about the possible lack of smaller and niche cultures that might come out of globalisation. Nowadays it feels not just that the map has overtaken the territory, but that it will become entirely colour-coded too. These hidden and smaller subcultures or lone cultures almost seem impossible under a system where everything is known and homogenised as much as possible.
Quote by EndTheRapture51
who pays five hundred fucking dollars for a burger
#12
Here is a rare picture of a remote tribe that uses their remotes to race little cars.  Notice their native salute and that the more dominate males wear hats as a sign of strength and power. 

     
Last edited by Way Cool JR. at Jun 24, 2017,
#13
It's such a difficult question. On one hand, they have a right to be left alone and not have their culture eradicated by globalization. On the other hand, do they really have enough information about the modern world to make an informed decision regarding their participation? Or worse yet, is withholding that knowledge from them because you want their culture to remain just another way of controlling them and treating them like a museum piece instead of a group of people?
Check out my band Disturbed
#14
Quote by StewieSwan
It's such a difficult question. On one hand, they have a right to be left alone and not have their culture eradicated by globalization. On the other hand, do they really have enough information about the modern world to make an informed decision regarding their participation? Or worse yet, is withholding that knowledge from them because you want their culture to remain just another way of controlling them and treating them like a museum piece instead of a group of people?


like
My God, it's full of stars!
#15
Quote by StewieSwan
It's such a difficult question. On one hand, they have a right to be left alone and not have their culture eradicated by globalization. On the other hand, do they really have enough information about the modern world to make an informed decision regarding their participation? Or worse yet, is withholding that knowledge from them because you want their culture to remain just another way of controlling them and treating them like a museum piece instead of a group of people?


that's the question really

longing rusted furnace daybreak seventeen benign nine homecoming one freight car
#16
I think the Starbucks and McDonald's posts are on point, it's amusing how readily we'll look down our noses at these so-called "primitive" cultures.

primitive from many but not all perspectives.
#17
i think that article is old as shit. i remember reading that years ago.

the tribe pictured are all probably living in air conditioned buildings and posting "on my way to work" and pictures of their dinner with #foodie by now.
mugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmugmug
#18
As long as their society doesn't commit immoral or unjust acts (or just unjust systems), they are fine to do whatever the hell they want. We are not responsible for "giving them information", nor we are guilty if we "withdraw information from them" (because we are not responsible in the first place).

But yeah, if they have rituals/cultures where shitty stuff clearly goes on, then I think they should get "globalized", at the very least in the non-shitty things (e.g treat women well, don't murder each other, etc).

If someone breaks the law, do you care about their culture? The answer is "no" when taking into account subcultures in modern countries, so why should the answer be "yes" for these cultures/tribes? We are all human, why are they not bound to moral codes that we are bound to? Are they not bound to it just because "they didn't know better" and had no education or knowledge of it? Does it mean the application of the law should be relative to people who "didnt' know any better" in your own country too? Is some boy in a remote rural town allowed to murder anybody he wants because he wasn't part of the globalized culture? Is someone who was homeschooled and didn't socialize with anybody also allowed to murder anybody he wants?

The worst insult you can give these tribes is treat them like animals, treat them as some things that have no agency (like if they were some chimpanzees we study, observe and let live in the jungle). They are humans, like you and I, and the best thing we can do is treat them with equality and respect in that area. For me, that includes giving them freedom, but also judging their actions like we do any other human on the planet
#19
Quote by gonzaw
As long as their society doesn't commit immoral or unjust acts
Quote by EndTheRapture51
who pays five hundred fucking dollars for a burger
#20
what they need is a new amp 
Quote by jrcsgtpeppers
There shall be a stop to this madness. The battle is not over. My tasty licks aren't going anywhere.

Quote by The_Blode
^ I've just realised if you say Simple Plan's 2011 effort "Get Your Heart On!" really fast in a Southern American accent, it sounds gross. . .like sexual gross!

Quote by Necroheadbanger
Hello.
I'm looking for professional bongo-ists and triangle-ists to make a Progressive Technical Brutal Death Metal band
(will be called AxOxJxLxAxIxVxXxUxWxZxQxUxRxWxGxJxSxAxLxKxMxNxHxUxGxAxAxWxVxCxBxZxVx)
(Don't even ask what it means)


https://soundcloud.com/95dank



#21
I think if I was a member of one of these ancient tribes I would do everything I could to preserve every last drop of my culture's history, because when the western world eventually blows itself up and dies off, who else will teach our fellow brethren to once again live by their true and rightful ways?
Quote by Overlord
It's not hard to be nice, but it's nice to be hard
#22
Quote by gonzaw
But yeah, if they have rituals/cultures where shitty stuff clearly goes on, then I think they should get "globalized", at the very least in the non-shitty things (e.g treat women well, don't murder each other, etc).

If someone breaks the law, do you care about their culture? The answer is "no" when taking into account subcultures in modern countries, so why should the answer be "yes" for these cultures/tribes? We are all human, why are they not bound to moral codes that we are bound to? Are they not bound to it just because "they didn't know better" and had no education or knowledge of it? Does it mean the application of the law should be relative to people who "didnt' know any better" in your own country too? Is some boy in a remote rural town allowed to murder anybody he wants because he wasn't part of the globalized culture? Is someone who was homeschooled and didn't socialize with anybody also allowed to murder anybody he wants?
these people are free to be a bunch of cunts in every possible way. it's arrogant of you to think your 'superior' morals should be forced upon them
Quote by korinaflyingv
On the come up we were listening to Grateful Dead and the music started passing through my bowel and out my arsehole as this violet stream of light. I shat music. It was beautiful.
#24
they need proper education or we'll end up with something worse than that tribe that worship prince philip
#25
Quote by Carnivean
who else will teach our fellow brethren to once again live by their true and rightful ways?

I really doubt incest will ever make a comeback, but nobody's gonna stop you from finding and living with a remote tribe that allows it.
Free Ali
Free Lard
#28
Quote by Burgery
these people are free to be a bunch of cunts in every possible way. it's arrogant of you to think your 'superior' morals should be forced upon them


So you agree with normative moral relativism? These groups have their own culture and if they do things we see as heinous and horrible, they are entitled to do so and we should leave them alone? (EDIT: should rephrase that as "tolerate and not judge them" instead)
Tribes in Africa have people who kidnap the daughters of other people, bring them to a witch doctor who tortures her, dismembers her and sacrifices her just so the dude can have "good luck". I guess it's arrogant to believe my "superior" morals indicate that is wrong, and it is arrogant for me to "force" said morals on that tribe. We should let them be and let those girls suffer horrible deaths for ignorant reasons I suppose, right?
Last edited by gonzaw at Jun 25, 2017,
#30
Quote by smb
they need proper education or we'll end up with something worse than that tribe that worship prince philip

Soon they'll become that tribe that formerly worshiped the deity formerly known as prince philip
You are now using UG Black.
You are now using UG Classic.


Listening to: Chick Corea, Yes, Genesis, Jethro Tull


It is I, the mighty shitkicker, as prophesied by JustRooster. Obey me.
#31
Quote by Wolfinator-x
Soon they'll become that tribe that formerly worshiped the deity formerly known as prince philip

And they shall party as though it were unto one thousand, nine hundred and ninety nine.

You know, Phil's age.
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#32
are we just making prince jokes in this thread now

does every online discussion these days tend towards puns

guess it's a sign of the times
#33
Quote by smb
are we just making prince jokes in this thread now

does every online discussion these days tend towards puns

guess it's a sign of the times

Reddit is especially guilty of this. The puns just keep pouring out like rain that just happens to be purple.
You are now using UG Black.
You are now using UG Classic.


Listening to: Chick Corea, Yes, Genesis, Jethro Tull


It is I, the mighty shitkicker, as prophesied by JustRooster. Obey me.
#34
Quote by gonzaw
So you agree with normative moral relativism? These groups have their own culture and if they do things we see as heinous and horrible, they are entitled to do so and we should leave them alone? (EDIT: should rephrase that as "tolerate and not judge them" instead)
Tribes in Africa have people who kidnap the daughters of other people, bring them to a witch doctor who tortures her, dismembers her and sacrifices her just so the dude can have "good luck". I guess it's arrogant to believe my "superior" morals indicate that is wrong, and it is arrogant for me to "force" said morals on that tribe. We should let them be and let those girls suffer horrible deaths for ignorant reasons I suppose, right?
yeah lol

might do a srs reply later am worky
Quote by korinaflyingv
On the come up we were listening to Grateful Dead and the music started passing through my bowel and out my arsehole as this violet stream of light. I shat music. It was beautiful.
#35
no offy but moral relativism is pretty weak

like just philosophically there are a dozen good arguments against the logic of its core premises (disclaimer: actual number of arguments in link may not amount to a dozen. Their criticisms of these positions is sometimes simplistic, even when they accuse a position of being simplistic. but still good)

Quote by EndTheRapture51
who pays five hundred fucking dollars for a burger
Last edited by Banjocal at Jun 25, 2017,
#36
i prefer diatribes tbh
There's no such thing; there never was. Where I am going you cannot follow me now.
#37
Quote by Banjocal
no offy but moral relativism is pretty weak

like just philosophically there are a dozen good arguments against the logic of its core premises (disclaimer: actual number of arguments in link may not amount to a dozen. Their criticisms of these positions is sometimes simplistic, even when they accuse a position of being simplistic. but still good)



Uh. I get more and more wary of positions being categorized the way they are. According to the video (and ... everyone I suppose), if you believe ALL moral propositions are relative, you are a relativist; if you believe ALL propositions are objective, you are a moral objectivist, but if you believe ALL propositions are relative, except one, you are still a moral objectivist. So ... do these "positions" matter at all? You tell me that someone who thinks everything is relative except 1 proposition believes the same thing as someone who thinks everything is objective?

Also, like, yeah, if you have a contrived definition of what "relativism" is, you can easily define it so it's logically inconsistent and "obviously" false, and then claim that moral objectivism is obviously superior. Well, of course it is obviously superior if you define it as "anything tha'ts not relativism". But is that which you defined valuable at all? I might as well claim I am a "Whatever is true and real-ist" and that is the best possible philosophical position you can ever have, because it is obviously true and real.

And, doesn't it also conflate relative with subjective? Giving insulin to a pacient is indeed relative like he said (in one situation it is right to give it to someone, in another situation it is right to not give it t him but to another one), and in fact he stated that objectivists agree with such situation (objective + relative is a valid combo). But is cultural relativism actually relative? Isn't it actually subjective? It states the moral system of any culture is right, and no one is any more right than any other. That's subjective (just because it gives the power to a group of people or a culture instead of an individual doesn't mean it stops being subjective)

Am I getting utterly confused here? I seem to be getting the idea that everything is purposefully confusing and could be made much much simpler.

EDIT: I also dislike the kind of strawman argument of "This theory of morality states that morality is subjective, therefore nobody can judge anybody and everybody is allowed to murder anybody they want. Therefore that theory is false" A theory that states there is no objective morality would also introduce a framework for the other things we associate with an objective morality. Morality doesn't exist by itself, it's prescriptive, it introduces judgements of the character of a person/institution, it introduces social institutions and imperatives that define what should be done when an immoral action is taken, etc. A subjective morality theory would (and should) provide alternatives for all of them. Therefore, if morality is subjective, it doesn't mean that everybody is right and therefore there should be social chaos and mayhem for no reason, it just means that a different framework will be applied (so that there is no such social chaos).
It's wrong to say that because you believe in subjective morality you must necessarily be ok with another person raping and murdering other people, and that you should tolerate him and pat him in the back. That is, again, a strawman
Last edited by gonzaw at Jun 25, 2017,
#38
Quote by smb
does every online discussion these days tend towards puns

Bitch don't kill my tribe
Free Ali
Free Lard
#39
Why isnt tribe wars a thing? Like you take one isolated tribe and you pit them against another isolated tribe in a battle of wits and savagery. First tribe to wipe out the other tribe wins their isolation.
Most of the important things


in the world have been accomplished


by people who have kept on


trying when there seemed to be no hope at all
#40
Quote by Nelshizzle
Why isnt tribe wars a thing? Like you take one isolated tribe and you pit them against another isolated tribe in a battle of wits and savagery. First tribe to wipe out the other tribe wins their isolation.


Can we televise it

longing rusted furnace daybreak seventeen benign nine homecoming one freight car
Page 1 of 2