Quinn explains these truths in an accessible way that almost anyone can read and understand. His point here is not to write an 800 page book of scientific gibberish that most people will not being interested in. He's trying to show an idea to a lot of people. If he were to construct an absolutely irrefutable argument with every piece of evidence that exists, the book would be too huge for him to write or anyone to read.
@landland44 The evidence is everywhere. Quinn shows the reader how to see it. In the book, Ishmael has different students, and has to teach each differently. Quinn has written a book that, since he can't write it differently for each person, he's tried to make pretty universal. Including all the evidence would make it so that only anthropologists and sociologists would be interested.
You also said that the argument being presented is from an authority, and that Ishmael's telepathy is meant to make us follow the argument like sheep. No, the authority of the argument comes from its explanation, not who's saying it. A human, a gorilla, or a rock could be saying it; it would be no less true. The entire book is a huge presentation of evidence, but it's not an anthropology or sociology textbook. It is a fictional story that holds up real truths.
You say that Ishmael's telepathy is supposed to make the reader accept his authority. I highly doubt that was Quinn's meaning. Who is going to accept an idea based on it being presented by the a fictional character with a (for all we really know) fictional ability? Daniel Quinn is not an idiot. Ishmael's telepathy was beside the point of the book; it served to allow a gorilla to present these ideas to a human, which illustrates the ideas' universal truth, regardless of who is saying them.
I'm reading it now... I will say it almost lost me but it kept me for the same reason. Now I'm hooked. Can anyone recommend another thought provoking book like this?
@jessemparker You'd probably love "My Ishmael" if you liked "Ishmael" that much. It's a sequel that elaborates on the first book's ideas, and also focuses on some specific points. "The Story of B" is also by Daniel Quinn. I haven't read it yet, but it's apparently also great.
Hey! happy your reviewing Ishmael. I think the main point of the book, and most of Daniel Quinn's literature is that we can't ignore pre-history, or human culture before the surviving written record. While we can't exalt indigenous cultures as perfect, I think that they understood that they were a part of nature, and not separate from it. Their laws, way of life, were not absolute and difficult to change like ours, they allowed their way of life to form by trial and error.
if something didn't work, it was changed. While the people of these cultures still conformed to a status quo. Personal dignity and freedom seemed to be a high priority, from what I've read about native cultures in america, these people had a completely different way of thinking than western cultures. We like to think we hold life as our first priority, but in practice these cultures embraced the world in a way we can hardly fathom. they truly believed in the golden rule.
These cultures were ruled by magical thinking. They are at least several phases of development behind the most current paradigms. It is important to respect life, but does not mean all technology is bad. All life is technology. The thing we have to guard against is the trauma we inflict on the environment with it.
"magical thinking," do you mean they thought of the natural system as magical or mystical? I never said all technology is bad, we have used technology throughout human history, but the massive amounts of mining, extraction, and manufacturing needed to support our consumer economy; the degradation of the soil, air, and life systems will not stop until we have another system to fall back upon. Like localized permaculture systems and d.i.y. manufacturing.
The Capitalism and monetary that pervades global trade is to a large extent responsible for what is happening. It is a system that seemingly requires exponential growth just to stay afloat. Capitalism systematically eliminates diversity. The infrastructure supporting society is fragile and easily crashed.
Oh yeah, encouraging subsistence farmers to grow cash crops can be devastating. In the Indian cotton belt the importation of subsidized US cotton has caused prices to fall. The more expensive GMOs sold to Indian farmers have caused an alarming rise in farmer suicides. At one time most small farmers used 80% of their crops for subsistence, growing wide varieties from traditional seeds. Now, the growers that switched to Monsanto seeds are in debt, forced to sell their land and work as laborers.
who are you to say what the book said was wrong or right? and reply to : "Well, it could be argued that Quinn was under no such pressure to PROVE his teachings. He doesn't give us much of a choice: Abandon civilization and die by the billions as food runs out (OR) Continue civilization unabated until we destroy the earth. I choose none of the above. What is needed is:
1) Renewable energy
2) Population control"
his last choice wasnt those, it was: invent, get it right
I agree with you on most points made. Very good review. I have only read 3/4 of it but did notice that the argument contained in it isn't perfectly accurate. Or at least the examples aren't perfect. I did enjoy it, however, and I think it is an important and powerful book.
Some of the arguments against the myth contained in Mother Culture and enacted by the Takers are too simple. Some religious/cultural myths ARE actually based upon living a harmonious, civilized life. Taoism, kosher diet...
Exactly. I'm not sure why you are disagreeing. Both of these are religious examples of trying to live in harmony with nature. Neither are from so-called "Leaver" cultures. Taoism could be found in a Leaver culture but it's also found in urban areas.
Quinn's analysis of the Cain/Abel myth doesn't sound quite right either. The murder that took place seems (to me) to be more about what happens when a culture establishes certain things as Good. The ones outside of The Good tend to be angry.
Well, it could be argued that Quinn was under no such pressure to PROVE his teachings. He doesn't give us much of a choice: Abandon civilization and die by the billions as food runs out (OR) Continue civilization unabated until we destroy the earth. I choose none of the above. What is needed is:
1) where is it. you'll NEVER see it, because sustainable technology isn't lucritive.
2) it'will NEVER happen, as long as totalitarian agriculture is being practiced. Every creature's population is directly proportionate to it's food supply. Right now, we produce enough food for 7 billion people. By the time we have 7 billion people, we will be producing enough food for 7.5 billion people. That's how it's been working for several thousand years.
1) It isn't currently lucrative because the cost of destroying the environment is externalized and passed off to the public. This distorts the market and pushes corporations into polluting.
2) You should study population growth by country. There are some countries already with negative population growth. The keys seem to be providing a secure environment and empowering women.
The part about population increasing with food supply has not proven itself true, in fact, security in adulthood is reason to invest more in less children. It is how advanced species have developed, with mammals having the slowest growth rate.
where is this coming from? what information is leading you to these conclusions? there IS EMPIRICAL DATA from the last 10 or 12 thousand years that clearly shows (from where the civilization begins and the other places where this agricultural practice took hold) that food production increased EVERY YEAR RIGHT UP TO THIS PRESENT DATE fueling the growth of human populations. without more food there can not be more people. if you make a claim, back it up.
The scarcity of food effects the death rate, not necessarily the birth rate. The birth rate is determined by the amount of investment made in each individual offspring. Parents invest in offspring to prevent childhood death. In famine and genocide it is often the children who die first. Take a good look at the countries with the highest population growth. I would not consider them the most civilized.
i'm guessing you didn't google the names of the scientists i left... and since your unable or willing to supply your sources i will leave this exchange for more productive fields (as it were).
Google birth and death rate and you will find the stats on population growth by country. Read Richard Dawkins if you want to know more about how evolution works.
I'm saying humans have always left a wake of devastation. The reason people organize is to deal with scarcity. Tribes are extremely territorial and have no qualms about killing trespassers. They occur quite spontaneously, for example, gangs in urban environments. You have this mistaken notion that somehow man lived in a state of grace before becoming civilized. Man has always been civilized in one way or another. Chimpanzees are civilized.
I should say that tribes definitely do swallow other tribes. The only thing that prevents this is specialized adaptation to a particular environment. Social organizations were absolutely essential for security before any human could make an investment in property. What good would it do you to put all that work into a farm only to have your neighbors consume it? All social animals, humans, primates, dogs, buffalo, etc, are territorial. Humans have just been particularly successful at this.
scarcity is a invention of capitalistic ideology. with the constant growth of populations there are fewer and fewer resources! more food, more people, fewer resource! aaaaahhhhh! this continent had old growth forest from east to west! where are they now? there were thousand and thousands of diverse species where are they now. ever growing populaces gobbled them up! and the indians living here for 20 thousand years only fostered their existence. explain that!
Scarcity is a condition that can occur naturally due to climate, disease, and a number of different causes. Scarcity more than anything else causes war when there are a large number of competitors. As I said the number of participants change the dynamics of the game and it becomes more attractive to eliminate the competition when there are fewer participants. There was rampant tribal warfare. There was also a high degree of agricultural development, namely, the development of CORN.
Comment removed
ScoobyDewbieDoo 5 months ago
Quinn explains these truths in an accessible way that almost anyone can read and understand. His point here is not to write an 800 page book of scientific gibberish that most people will not being interested in. He's trying to show an idea to a lot of people. If he were to construct an absolutely irrefutable argument with every piece of evidence that exists, the book would be too huge for him to write or anyone to read.
landland44 1 year ago
@landland44 The evidence is everywhere. Quinn shows the reader how to see it. In the book, Ishmael has different students, and has to teach each differently. Quinn has written a book that, since he can't write it differently for each person, he's tried to make pretty universal. Including all the evidence would make it so that only anthropologists and sociologists would be interested.
landland44 1 year ago
@landland44 If you think there's no evidence presented, maybe try re-reading the book and really looking at the world we live in for a few minutes.
landland44 1 year ago
You also said that the argument being presented is from an authority, and that Ishmael's telepathy is meant to make us follow the argument like sheep. No, the authority of the argument comes from its explanation, not who's saying it. A human, a gorilla, or a rock could be saying it; it would be no less true. The entire book is a huge presentation of evidence, but it's not an anthropology or sociology textbook. It is a fictional story that holds up real truths.
landland44 1 year ago
You say that Ishmael's telepathy is supposed to make the reader accept his authority. I highly doubt that was Quinn's meaning. Who is going to accept an idea based on it being presented by the a fictional character with a (for all we really know) fictional ability? Daniel Quinn is not an idiot. Ishmael's telepathy was beside the point of the book; it served to allow a gorilla to present these ideas to a human, which illustrates the ideas' universal truth, regardless of who is saying them.
landland44 1 year ago
I'm reading it now... I will say it almost lost me but it kept me for the same reason. Now I'm hooked. Can anyone recommend another thought provoking book like this?
jessemparker 1 year ago
@jessemparker You'd probably love "My Ishmael" if you liked "Ishmael" that much. It's a sequel that elaborates on the first book's ideas, and also focuses on some specific points. "The Story of B" is also by Daniel Quinn. I haven't read it yet, but it's apparently also great.
landland44 1 year ago
Hey! happy your reviewing Ishmael. I think the main point of the book, and most of Daniel Quinn's literature is that we can't ignore pre-history, or human culture before the surviving written record. While we can't exalt indigenous cultures as perfect, I think that they understood that they were a part of nature, and not separate from it. Their laws, way of life, were not absolute and difficult to change like ours, they allowed their way of life to form by trial and error.
newman09 2 years ago
if something didn't work, it was changed. While the people of these cultures still conformed to a status quo. Personal dignity and freedom seemed to be a high priority, from what I've read about native cultures in america, these people had a completely different way of thinking than western cultures. We like to think we hold life as our first priority, but in practice these cultures embraced the world in a way we can hardly fathom. they truly believed in the golden rule.
newman09 2 years ago
These cultures were ruled by magical thinking. They are at least several phases of development behind the most current paradigms. It is important to respect life, but does not mean all technology is bad. All life is technology. The thing we have to guard against is the trauma we inflict on the environment with it.
j0hnwi11iams 2 years ago
"magical thinking," do you mean they thought of the natural system as magical or mystical? I never said all technology is bad, we have used technology throughout human history, but the massive amounts of mining, extraction, and manufacturing needed to support our consumer economy; the degradation of the soil, air, and life systems will not stop until we have another system to fall back upon. Like localized permaculture systems and d.i.y. manufacturing.
newman09 2 years ago
The Capitalism and monetary that pervades global trade is to a large extent responsible for what is happening. It is a system that seemingly requires exponential growth just to stay afloat. Capitalism systematically eliminates diversity. The infrastructure supporting society is fragile and easily crashed.
j0hnwi11iams 2 years ago
Oh yeah, encouraging subsistence farmers to grow cash crops can be devastating. In the Indian cotton belt the importation of subsidized US cotton has caused prices to fall. The more expensive GMOs sold to Indian farmers have caused an alarming rise in farmer suicides. At one time most small farmers used 80% of their crops for subsistence, growing wide varieties from traditional seeds. Now, the growers that switched to Monsanto seeds are in debt, forced to sell their land and work as laborers.
newman09 2 years ago
i dont like the cut of this guys jib, and i pretty sure he doesn't kow the meaning of the word: arbitrary lol
ILLEGITIMATE01 2 years ago
I would probably have to be a member of your circle jerk club.
j0hnwi11iams 2 years ago 2
who are you to say what the book said was wrong or right? and reply to : "Well, it could be argued that Quinn was under no such pressure to PROVE his teachings. He doesn't give us much of a choice: Abandon civilization and die by the billions as food runs out (OR) Continue civilization unabated until we destroy the earth. I choose none of the above. What is needed is:
1) Renewable energy
2) Population control"
his last choice wasnt those, it was: invent, get it right
zanfankid 3 years ago
He never explicitly suggests anything. It is the lack of suggestions that leaves us with those choices.
j0hnwi11iams 3 years ago
I agree with you on most points made. Very good review. I have only read 3/4 of it but did notice that the argument contained in it isn't perfectly accurate. Or at least the examples aren't perfect. I did enjoy it, however, and I think it is an important and powerful book.
Some of the arguments against the myth contained in Mother Culture and enacted by the Takers are too simple. Some religious/cultural myths ARE actually based upon living a harmonious, civilized life. Taoism, kosher diet...
Barklord 3 years ago
uh.... what????
taoism and kosher diet have nothing to do with deforestation or urbanization....
zzz33333 3 years ago
Exactly. I'm not sure why you are disagreeing. Both of these are religious examples of trying to live in harmony with nature. Neither are from so-called "Leaver" cultures. Taoism could be found in a Leaver culture but it's also found in urban areas.
Quinn's analysis of the Cain/Abel myth doesn't sound quite right either. The murder that took place seems (to me) to be more about what happens when a culture establishes certain things as Good. The ones outside of The Good tend to be angry.
Barklord 3 years ago
Were you implying that the ape was slingin BS?
dnHooligan 3 years ago
i thought Ishmael was more of "the voice of nature" not some know-it-all jackass.
zzz33333 3 years ago
I took him as the best 'person' to teach others about captivity. I don't remember where it banned the research of his knowledge.
dnHooligan 3 years ago
It *IS* a work of fiction. It is thought provoking but not the final word on the subject.
j0hnwi11iams 3 years ago
The only thing I took as fiction was the mind-talking gorilla. I challenge anyone to disPROVE his teachings.
I would be interested on your critique of Derrick Jensen's 'Endgame.'
dnHooligan 3 years ago
Well, it could be argued that Quinn was under no such pressure to PROVE his teachings. He doesn't give us much of a choice: Abandon civilization and die by the billions as food runs out (OR) Continue civilization unabated until we destroy the earth. I choose none of the above. What is needed is:
1) Renewable energy
2) Population control
j0hnwi11iams 3 years ago
1) where is it. you'll NEVER see it, because sustainable technology isn't lucritive.
2) it'will NEVER happen, as long as totalitarian agriculture is being practiced. Every creature's population is directly proportionate to it's food supply. Right now, we produce enough food for 7 billion people. By the time we have 7 billion people, we will be producing enough food for 7.5 billion people. That's how it's been working for several thousand years.
dnHooligan 3 years ago
1) It isn't currently lucrative because the cost of destroying the environment is externalized and passed off to the public. This distorts the market and pushes corporations into polluting.
2) You should study population growth by country. There are some countries already with negative population growth. The keys seem to be providing a secure environment and empowering women.
j0hnwi11iams 3 years ago
I think Canada has negative population growth
DANE842 3 years ago
what is a work of fiction?
bbbleaver 3 years ago
typically they sling their own rather than that of other species ;)
DANE842 3 years ago
appreciate the review j0hn,
would you be willing to point out some of the 'claims' in ishmael that are not backed up with facts?
bbbleaver 3 years ago
oh, i meant to write this: in addition to the claims that have no evidences, what is your evidence that disproves it?
thankyou
bbb
bbbleaver 3 years ago
The part about population increasing with food supply has not proven itself true, in fact, security in adulthood is reason to invest more in less children. It is how advanced species have developed, with mammals having the slowest growth rate.
j0hnwi11iams 3 years ago
where is this coming from? what information is leading you to these conclusions? there IS EMPIRICAL DATA from the last 10 or 12 thousand years that clearly shows (from where the civilization begins and the other places where this agricultural practice took hold) that food production increased EVERY YEAR RIGHT UP TO THIS PRESENT DATE fueling the growth of human populations. without more food there can not be more people. if you make a claim, back it up.
bbbleaver 3 years ago
The scarcity of food effects the death rate, not necessarily the birth rate. The birth rate is determined by the amount of investment made in each individual offspring. Parents invest in offspring to prevent childhood death. In famine and genocide it is often the children who die first. Take a good look at the countries with the highest population growth. I would not consider them the most civilized.
j0hnwi11iams 3 years ago
i'm guessing you didn't google the names of the scientists i left... and since your unable or willing to supply your sources i will leave this exchange for more productive fields (as it were).
bbbleaver 3 years ago
Google birth and death rate and you will find the stats on population growth by country. Read Richard Dawkins if you want to know more about how evolution works.
j0hnwi11iams 3 years ago
"that's the thing about mankind, we have wars to eliminate things."
this is NOT a statement about mankind. this is a statement about civilized humans, a.k.a. Takers
zzz33333 3 years ago
Again I think you don't appreciate how territorial social organizations can be. Man is by nature a social creature, as are all apes.
j0hnwi11iams 3 years ago
i understand that.....
zzz33333 3 years ago
"it's actually a continuum."
you are saying humans naturally develop from leavers INTO takers.
that's not true.
zzz33333 3 years ago
I'm saying humans have always left a wake of devastation. The reason people organize is to deal with scarcity. Tribes are extremely territorial and have no qualms about killing trespassers. They occur quite spontaneously, for example, gangs in urban environments. You have this mistaken notion that somehow man lived in a state of grace before becoming civilized. Man has always been civilized in one way or another. Chimpanzees are civilized.
j0hnwi11iams 3 years ago
well, that's incorrect.
being territorial and killing trespassers is very different from swallowing other cultures, from growing perpetually. not all cultures do this.
i never said "man lived in a state of grace before becoming civilized."
i am saying, tribes work, and civilizations don't.
how are you saying chimpanzees are civilized?
are you joking?
define for me "civilization."
zzz33333 3 years ago
I should say that tribes definitely do swallow other tribes. The only thing that prevents this is specialized adaptation to a particular environment. Social organizations were absolutely essential for security before any human could make an investment in property. What good would it do you to put all that work into a farm only to have your neighbors consume it? All social animals, humans, primates, dogs, buffalo, etc, are territorial. Humans have just been particularly successful at this.
j0hnwi11iams 3 years ago
scarcity is a invention of capitalistic ideology. with the constant growth of populations there are fewer and fewer resources! more food, more people, fewer resource! aaaaahhhhh! this continent had old growth forest from east to west! where are they now? there were thousand and thousands of diverse species where are they now. ever growing populaces gobbled them up! and the indians living here for 20 thousand years only fostered their existence. explain that!
bbbleaver 3 years ago
Scarcity is a condition that can occur naturally due to climate, disease, and a number of different causes. Scarcity more than anything else causes war when there are a large number of competitors. As I said the number of participants change the dynamics of the game and it becomes more attractive to eliminate the competition when there are fewer participants. There was rampant tribal warfare. There was also a high degree of agricultural development, namely, the development of CORN.
j0hnwi11iams 3 years ago