Ethnohistory Discussion: Seminar #2

"In such condition, there is no place for industry; because the fruit thereof is uncertain: and consequently no culture of the earth; no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea; no commodious building; no instruments of moving and removing, such things as require much force; no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continued fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." (Hobbes)

"...who does not see that everything seems to remove savage man from the temptation and means of ceasing to be savage? His imagination suggests nothing to him; his heart asks nothing of him. His modest needs are so easily found at hand, and he is so far from the degree of knowledge necessary for desiring to acquire greater knowledge, that he can have neither foresight nor curiosity. The spectacle of nature becomes indifferent to him by dint of becoming familiar. There is always the same order, there are always the same revolutions; he does not have the mind to wonder at the greatest marvels; and one must not seek in him the philosophy that man needs in order to know how to observe once what he has seen every day. His soul, agitated by nothing, is given over to the sole sentiment of its present existence without any idea of the future, however near it may be, and his projects, as limited as hi views, barely extend to the end of the day. Such is, even today, the degree of foresight of the Carib: in the morning he sells his bed of cotton and in the evening he comes weeping to buy it back, for want of having foreseen that he would need it for the coming night." (Rousseau)

Key Questions:

  1. According to these two philosophers, what is the nature of human beings?

  2. According to these two philosophers, what is the nature of civilization?

  3. According to these two philosophers, what is the "proper condition" for human beings?

  4. Are all human beings human beings?

  5. Are "early" humans different from "later" humans?

  6. Are there still "early" humans?

Discussion Suggestions:

  1. Discuss the implications of 'savages' having a different mentality and rationality. Lucien Levi-Brule developed a theory in anthropology called mystic participation that said that 'savages' had a different mental constitution from 'civilized' humans.

  2. How does Rousseau's methodology vary from that of an anthropologist?

  3. Aristotle said that humans were social animals. Would Rousseau agree with Him? Would Hobbes agree with him?

  4. What are the basic differences between Rousseau's and Hobbes' view of the political realities of their day?

  5. How can positive stereotypes be damaging?

  6. How is Rousseau similar to Hobbes? Different?

  7. Discuss the image of "savage" and "primitive" as 'child'. What do these words originally mean and then later come to mean?

  8. How does the way these philosophers viewed non-Western peoples shape the way we see non-Western peoples?

  9. Francis Parkman said: "Spanish Civilization crushed the Indian; English civilization scorned and neglected him; French civilization embraced and cherished him." How are these attitudes reflected in the two philosophers we have examined?