Another recumbent rider who also blogs on WordPress recently wrote about the pros and cons of using ancient technology in preference to modern. He makes a good point, and he was careful to moderate it with the phrase “a rule of thumb.” He wrote, “I have developed a rule of thumb when evaluating if a health claim is true or not; If early humans did it, then it is good, otherwise it is bad.”
I didn’t want to instigate a long, drawn-out argument on his blog about this – mostly because I have no real argument – but I believe the subject does beg discussion, and this blog has been cooking in my mind for a couple of days now.
I have some of the same philosophies about life, though the rules are more complex. I make every effort to buy local organic produce, for instance, and there are lots of farms here about, but coffee doesn’t grow in northern California, so there’s an exception right there. And we aren’t giving up our computers.
Some of you know that I’m active in the Society for Creative Anachronisms, and that I have long studied the arts of the sword and the bow. However, if a crazed rapist were to break into the house, you know I’d reach for the Smith & Wesson. Even the most enthusiastic SCA-er will remind you that it’s “The middle ages as they should have been.” Like, no Plague, we wear eye-glasses, and if you try to take away women’s suffrage, we’ll kill you with your own sword.
And, of course, there are some of us who simply wouldn’t be alive today if it wasn’t for 21st Century medicine.
So, can we agree that some modern solutions are better than bronze age ones?
Let’s take a closer look at some ancestral solutions, though. The first question we have to ask is, “Which ancestors?” The ones from pre-electric 19th century, or shall we go back as far as Australopithecus? I’m not running around naked on the African savannah for anybody. The original blog was about shoes, and the earliest known shoes are from bronze-age Mesopotamia. That’s still a long ways to go back.
Difficult to pick, huh?
There is a popular television show on NBC called Revolution, and the major premise is that the entire world has been plunged into a permanent black out because all of the electricity has been turned off. Remember that scene from The Day the Earth Stood Still? (The superb 1951 version, not the bastardized 2008 one.) Well, it’s not 1951 anymore, and the consequences are even more dire. Suddenly, we’re back to 19th Century agrarian communities.
Revolution is escapist post-apocalypse fantasy, though certainly not as much so as the book Dies the Fire (one of my absolute fave books, by the way!) Have you ever worked a farm using 19th Century technology? I have. It’s fun for about a week. After that it’s just hard work, and lots of it. And quite frankly, I don’t believe the current world’s population could be fed that way.
So, where do I stand on this issue? Well, like almost everything else, it depends on the details.
More musings on this at another time.
Filed under: Culture, Farming, Movies, organic, Philosophy, Public Debate, SCA, sustainable farming, Television, traditional archery | Tagged: ancient technology, australopithecus, bronze-age, dies the fire, modern technology, revolution, SCA, the day the earth stood still |