Primitive Living Thread

Hello Lainons, Everyone has considered the possibility of living in the woods at least once in their lifes, in this thread we discuss the feasibility of this idea, why we should live a simpler life and also how to adopt this way of life. I believe we didn't evolved to sit in chair eight hours a day to come home at night and watch netflix, in /hum/ there is a thread about life being boring and monotonous and there is an answer that I like a lot: "I think that's normal. We're nomadic hunter gatherers at heart and brain, i think we miss moments of extreme stress and extreme joy. You will never know the pain of losing lived ones due to infection or even childbirth, you will not know the joy of succeeding a hunt knowing you can feed your tribe for multiple days neither will you have those deep connections with people. My point is, put yourself in "difficult" situations, like camping in the woods all alone, exploring caves, climbing mountains,.... It helps a lot. You evolved to find solutions to problems and in society most problems aren't problems based in objective reality."

I once got some survival guide and hiking books. They're in a backpack in my closet along with some other items like a compass, a shovel, a knife and some rope. Don't have any emergency food supplies, though. Conveivably, with enough practice runs, I think I could live for a short time in the mountains. I'd inevitably have to come back though for things like medical care.

I take a great deal of inspiration from the way humans did things hundred of years ago in my daily life. I use biomass for heat and fuel Navigating primarily by the location of the sun and moon... Making my own tools from wood and metal... getting most places under my own power (legs or more modern bicycle) I would hunt if were not so strictly regulated...I do some quiet trapping on small animals and cook them thoroughly. I live primarily in urban areas, so hunting can be troublesome, but there are always plenty of rodents and small game running around that are easy to catch. I live in a shelter I built myself, thought it is a modern machine at it's core. I could pretty easily just move out to a unpopulated area, and take up living there without much trouble.... I have enough reserves to be able to at least get a good start on building a permanent encampment somewhere. Maybe a tall mesa in Arizona or something.

I've got a lot of stuff on woodsmanship, survival and tracking, if anyone's interested in e-books.

>>10288 I am, please upload

>>10288 also if you have anything on planting, companion planting

I don't agree with his politics, but I recommend "Between the Lines of Drift" by Eric Rudolph. It's his account of evading the FBI while living in the Appalachian wilderness for over 5 years. It's an impressive account of survival and a page turner. https://www.armyofgod.com/EricLinesOfDrift%201_18_15Opened.pdf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Rudolph

I think at any point in evolution you could say "we didnt evolve for this". Its like saying "we didnt change for this". the first is a process the second is a point in time.

>>10303 but also im not necessarily disagreeing with your general stance. im still thinking about it.

>>10266 >hunting is troublesome insects are an endless source of food and fire should purge the nasty stuff from their exoskeleton >making tools from wood and metal making tools from metal? how the fuarrrk will you obtain any kind of metal in the wild. minecraft is a lie tools you make from wood won't last unless you have access to exotic types learn to shape rocks or you know buy some metal tools and save yourself the trouble you don't need to thank me just helping a lainon out

>>10307 >insects are an endless source of food and fire should purge the nasty stuff from their exoskeleton not poison though

>>10316 ...so don't eat the poisonous ones.

>>10298 Now that's interesting.

>>10264 Organized around the six essentials of survival (shelter, water, food, fire, comfort and health, and navigation), Wilderness Survival Handbook covers 100 skills and techniques, including preserving fire, building pit shelters, toolmaking, stoneboiling cookery, and trapping and hunting animals with handmade tools and weapons. By mastering these skills, you will be able to survive with few tools or provisions in any wilderness setting--forest, plain, desert, or tundra--in nearly any part of the world.

>>10264 I do agree to some extent. Some studies (source:) have shown that human brains have an easier time interpreting the texture of trees and grass than the smooth shapes they see in cities. I also agree that many people alive today are still tribal animals and their behavior belongs in the wild, not in any civilization. But I don't think spending just a few days "living the old ways" can help. Spending any time longer like that would probably be harmful as people might wanna go back or try to integrate some of what they learned where it doesn't belong. I also find that people who wish to permanently live in the woods as a solution to modern day problems are foolish. It's very ineffective area-wise so unless they plan on decimating the population, it will remain just a hobby for hobos.

>>10328 I had a copy of the SAS book for over half my life. It was a gift. It vanished without a trace recently so thanks for that.

>>10330 we could simply redesign cities and society to work better for real human psychological needs.

>>10332 more useful is the SAS combat handbook, which is that book but with added information on fighting guard dogs, sneak attacks, and SERE skills

>>10330 I am aware that the primitive way of living cannot sustain so many people like today. I am not sugesting anarcho-primitivism, just less technology for people that are interested and can afford living like that, like you said, a hobby.

>>10333 I don't think we can. Things currently are organized ad-hoc mixed with some interests of powerful people. Ad-hoc is the most optimized short-term strategy, and often the only one you can use when you don't have vast spare resources and empty spaces ideal for large projects. It's basically "do what you can" now and hope for the best. Powerful organizations do have some spare resources, but they'd rather keep it or spend it on remaining powerful.

>>10340 it could be adapted easily. The hard part would be destroying Capitalism, which is practically synonymous with civilization at this point.

Is there anything unique about humans that makes them more valuable than anything else? (I can do what I will but not will what I will) Do you think our moral perspective should extend beyond the utility of objects to man? (Imagine a "higher species" with same view of human's to lesser species to humans themselves) What would it mean to truly value nature beyond its aptitude for psychological and material extraction? How can one live morally in our world with these views?

Just saying, after having hiked a few thousand miles on the trail in my life time, living in a nice home is way better. My dad was a hiking nut and took me out on the AT for the first time at like age 2. I had finished the Long Trail by age 9. By age 13 I had hiked over 2/3 thirds of the AT. That soykaf is like kicking dead whales down the beach. The views are nice but no living outside is not fun.

>>10264 >You will never know the pain of losing lived ones due to infection or even childbirth, you will not know the joy of succeeding a hunt knowing you can feed your tribe for multiple days neither will you have those deep connections with people You need to step away from your computer and go outside. Maybe even travel to a 3d world country and tell the people how privileged they are for knowing what its like to lose their babies and depend on hunting and fishing for food. After you wake up from being knocked the fuarrrk out you can rethink your absolute stupidity and be happy about "experiencing extreme stress". If you live in the US just go to the poor regions of Appalachia if you want to experience hardship and living away from being urban centers. There is nothing stopping you from buying a gun and learning to hunt so you can feel the joy of feeding your family and neighbors with turkey or deer.

>>10266 What is your dwelling like, friend?

>>10375 I live in a small(long configuration, 4, 4 foot wide sides, 2, 6 foot wide sides) hexayurt of plywood and polystirene insulated with garbage and biomass I was able to scrounge from around the city. I live near a river that serves as a drainage outlet for the street water, and I have a rocket stove ,made out of an old muffler and some exhaust piping from a toyota corolla I found in the junk yard, in the center of my house to serve both as heating during our harsh winters, and to provide heat for boiling my water, and for cooking. The cops and regular folk dont look everywhere, and I found a nice little nook to skitter into to avoid notice. In the city, I sometimes feel like a roach, or maybe like one of the rats I see scampering around from time to time. The rocket stove also helps me remain undetected as it produces little/ 0 smoke, so long as I select my fuel with some thought.

>>10375 Funnily enough I have a full time job in the city as a robotics tech for a manufacturing company. lol So I am banking hard these days.

>>10370 You didn't understood. You should not aim at having confort, that's it.

human developmemts in my opinion are similar to evolution in that they cant be reversed, only become vestigial in the face of something greater. so I dont really think about going back not because I think new is always good or dont want to I just think its an imaginary option and pointless to pursue. I used to live on a ranch type deal, had to burn wood for heat and what not. Both me and my family get nostalgiac for it and sometimes wish we could return but only for a bit and unanimously agree we wouldn't want to live like that. Personal preference? Most likely. Still something to take into consideration for yourself knowing you wont ever forget the comforts of the city life or wherever. I dont think its much different then people who have kids to relive their own childhood its just human development instead of one humans development in many ways. Like I said you cant actually go back there, you just will be dissapointed. The past is best reserves for fond memories and not relived. Just my take though

>>10264 As someone who grew up in the sticks of Oregon (near Crater Lake), I have to say that unless you have permanent shelter, you're going to get fuarrrked up by either animals or weather. But yes, nature is beautiful and gives you a certain kind of energy that you don't get in town.

>>10652 honestly the idea of an individual living off the land in any capacity sounds nice until you realize it's only sustainable if you never slip up even a little bit. Humans are social creatures, we work best in small bands rather than alone.

>>10385 That isn't true about human development. People in some areas reverted to hunter/gather after being sedentary farmers for generations. Also, technologies are sometimes lost due to some devastating situation, exhaustion of local resources, cultural prohibitions, etc. Human development is not a simple straight line with an arrow in only one direction.

If the local environment supports it, the hunter-gatherer lifestyle is best. As population increases and environment degrades, people are forced to develop compensating technologies and accept inferior lifestyles. From pastoral to agricultural to industrial, each increase in population and technology comes at the cost of eroding environment, freedoms, and satisfactions. Civilization is a downward spiral into human misery.

How to Stay Alive in the Woods Where the Fish Are The Trapper's Bible

How to Build and Furnish a Log Cabin How to Create a New Vegetable Garden A Comprehensive Guide to Wildernes and Travel Medicine

>>10264 We romanticize it in the modern day, but living like a caveman is actually fuarrrking horrible and if life was just about enjoying extremely contrasting emotions and feeling "deep" connections to people who are the only people you ever see, then humanity would have stayed like that. But we explore, we invent and we're never fuarrrking happy with our current comforts. That is what makes us great.

>>14966 >living like a caveman is actually fuarrrking horrible How would you know?

>>14967 Average life expectancy.

>>14969 same as for modern humans if you cut out infant mortality and violence

>>14970 ah okay so if you forget that it's an average, it's not so bad. You *might* live to see your 80s despite statistically you're likely to die by 26 by either starvation, violence, injury or sickness but of course that is if you don't die as an infant before you get the chance. But hey, you can get a start on this wholesome paleolithic lifestyle but never again having a hot shower, supplementing your now meager diet by eating insects and just forget that doctors and medicine exist.

>>14971 eating insects will be the norm in the modern world within the next 10 years or so

>>14972 And aspirations to become a doctor are falling away in favour of becoming an investment banker. So maybe society will become primitive again in a couple more generations anyway.

>>14971 Not >>14970, just jumping in. >You *might* live to see your 80s despite statistically you're likely to die by 26 by either starvation, violence, injury or sickness but of course that is if you don't die as an infant before you get the chance. >you're likely to die by 26 Check the curves, I'm not a stats whizz but they appear to suggest that as long as you make it past the initial high infant mortality rate (~.3-.45), you should make it to ~50. Mean lifespan across all groups in the paper is 54.1, I've crudely plotted it vs. present day mean lifespans for reference. I find it interesting to note that until ~1955, the only two regions that could beat primitive mean lifespan were North America and Europe. As an adult male in the USA in 2017, you can expect to live 76.1 years (assuming no impending environmental collapse/ etc.) A gain of ~20 years, certainly, but the question of cost remains relevant (and worth discussing further in later posts). If you check the death rate figures (and my crude attempt at overlaying them), the only things we've done to boost mean lifespan are: 1) Drastically quash infant mortality 2) Push back the spike in mortality rate from 75 to ~85 >you're likely to die by 26 by either starvation, violence, injury or sickness Unfortunately I cannot find any data on specific causes of death in primitive society. If you can find and share some, I would really appreciate it. >But hey, you can get a start on this wholesome paleolithic lifestyle but never again having a hot shower, supplementing your now meager diet by eating insects and just forget that doctors and medicine exist. Just reads like soykaf spilling. Primitive living will never be easy or fair, but that does not imply that a primitive life would be an unfulfilling one relative to PRESENT DAY, PRESENT TIME. We should discuss tradeoffs further in future posts. tl;dr: You can expect to live ~20 years longer if you are a USA male in 2017 with no significant changes in future ala climate change, warfare, societal collapse, etc. But primative peoples who made it past infant age could expect to live to ~54, a reasonable lifespan. Dying as an infant would suck, I'm not debating that, but it is misleading to say that all primative people lead miserable lives and die by 26. Benefits of primative lifestyle vs PRESENT DAY, PRESENT time should be discussed in other posts. Papers and more figures cited in next post bc image limits.

>>14980 More figures. Did my best to extract data from cdc fig for comparison.

>>14980 >>14981 And the papers. Hope I didn't miss anything.

>>14971 the statistically most common way to die without modern medicine is from sickness as an infant.

>>14969 Apples and oranges. Longevity has nothing to do with quality of life, i.e. 50 years of happiness and satisfaction is far better than 100 years of misery.

>>14966 I don't know if it's romanticized. I think all of us from time to time need to reflect on how much we rely on conveniences and it behooves us to learn how to do basic things on our own and roleplay these skills from time to time with camping or outdoor activities. Even in your home you can make bread or grow house plants. There are skills every person should have and practice. I have a garden. If I had to hunt, I'd be a vegetarian. I can't do much with my gardening skills, but when properly motivated I can put myself in a position to get lucky.

>>14969 life expectancy isn't indicative in a positive change in quality of life. people today are suffering psychologically in ways that were just not happening in the past. and this isn't some minority either. suicide rates just keep climbing and climbing and so do rates of depression

>>14972 no it will not. the reason people have evolved to be afraid of insects is precisely because they are so dangerous. insects are hone to all kind of viruses, parasites, diseases, etc. i guarantee that eating insects will stay a small thing. the only reason people eat them in soykafhole countries is because good food was never guaranteed to be there. TL;DR i'm not giving up eating beef and so is the majority of the civilised modern world

>>19708 sorry but this post is boneheaded as hell. Statistically, a disease more adapted to infecting mammals will be the one most likely to jump from animals to humans. Bubonic plague, HIV, mad cow disease, etc. etc. Insects which do not eat mammal blood are extremely unlikely to carry any diseases which could jump to a human. You are significantly more likely to get some kind of antibiotic-resistant disease from eating ridiculous amounts of beef than you are from eating crickets.

>>19709 what is malaria?

>>19711 a disease that spreads through animals that drink mammal blood. Try again.

>>19713 sure, lain

>>19730 do you... not know what malaria is? Do you really think you'll get malaria from eating crickets?

>>14945 Hence exists books like: Civilization on Trial

>>19734 Even if they were to carry it, that's why one cooks food. There's a lot of animals which aren't safe to eat unless properly cooked. Even pork is rather fussy.

Imo, the best possible lifestyle would be hunter-gatherer in an environment that supports it well. The chief enemy there is overpopulation, because it takes a large amount of the right kind of environment to support each forager. Once theee are too many people, they have to start searching for better places and develop technology like farming, and other survival technologies for harsher conditions, which is a much inferior way to live.

>>19933 some hunter-gatherers do modify their environment, e.g. natives in California would plant and maintain tanoaks in the forest and would occasionally do controlled burns. But that only works up to a certain point, it is true that the hunter-gatherer lifestyle requires low population density.

>>19933 A hunter-gatherer society with ritualistic culling of women after second birth and newborns. If you ingrain this behavior into folklore, such society can sustain itself very long without damaging the environment and dire need for industrial population control techniques such as feminism, contraceptives and abortion.

>>20009 I don't think you've actually studied any hunter gatherer societies. This sounds like another MRA wet dream.

>>20010 Since we are discussing this on lainchan right now, it is bold to assume hunter-gatherers indeed multiplied in numbers and populated the Earth, consuming more and more resources. In order to prevent such situation from happening again, a self-sustaining primitive culling mechanism for humanity is required. Do you have any valuable contribution other than name-calling? There are no contraceptive pills or abortions in hunter-gatherer societies, the only equal solution to reduce reproduction capabilities is culling of fetus-bearing sex. Culling seed-bearing sex produces opposite effect evidenced in birth booms after every war.

>>20013 Overpopulation simply isn't the problem for hunter gatherers that you assume it to be. There is usually a gap between births in tribal societies because babies and toddlers are never apart from their mothers, and that in and of itself deters sexual relations. If a tribe "overpopulates" it then spreads out of starts dying off from lack of resources. Global or region wide overpopulation never becomes a problem. Overpopulation was first a product of farming societies who needed more hands to work the fields.

I've always loved the outdoors

>>20009 >A hunter-gatherer society with ritualistic culling of women after second birth and newborns. This would lead to negative population growth, and it would also just be nasty and unnecessary. The vast majority of women do not manage to raise more than 3 children to adulthood without modern industrial medicine. Most hunter-gatherer societies didn't have huge overpopulation problems because they had high infant mortality and birth mortality rates. Plus it's not hard to make a decent guess at when a woman is going to be fertile and avoid it. >>20013 >it is bold to assume hunter-gatherers indeed multiplied in numbers and populated the Earth, consuming more and more resources. yes, without medicine or industry populations tend to expand until they reach a carrying capacity.

>>20018 > without medicine or industry populations tend to expand until they reach a carrying capacity Yes, exactly right. Stone age societies weren't capable of the level of resource extraction we are. They were a part of the ecosystem they lived in and not running some machine trying to conquer it. Even their garbage was like, animal bones and bits of flint, stuff like that.

>>20016 >I've always loved the outdoors The biosphere is the most beautiful thing in the vastness of the universe. It will be a shame when it no longer exists. I'm glad you are enjoying it while you can. :3

Good thread.

If you've ever lived on the street or in the woods (I've done both), you know that the things you need are: water food a place to sleep a place to crap a place to shower Those are the fundamental necessities of life.

>>20327 > forgets to mention oxygen first > never lived in low earth orbit inside shipping containers held together with caulk and gaffer tape Everyone laugh at this noob.

>>20031 the biosphere will be around for quite a long time.

>>20542 >both for his thoughts on simple living such as "have your mom do your laundry"