From: gts (gts_2000@yahoo.com)
Date: Tue Apr 22 2003 - 17:48:23 MDT
Damien Sullivan wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 02:20:57AM -0400, gts wrote:
>
>> Thanks, I think I understand now what you and Diamond mean. <snip>
> See, for me "destructive nature" is roughly synonymous with
> "tends to destroy things", not with "deliberately
> vandalistic". And naive exploitation of the environment is
> destructive, as reflected by the extinct species, and the
> many civilizations which have damaged their own environment,
> which I thought Diamond was going to write about in another
> book by now. Deliberately destroyed? No. But destroyed just the
> same.
Yes, that's my take also, now that mez has helped me understand Diamond.
Apparently Diamond takes a behaviorist view of human nature. He is not
interested in what might be going on the conscious minds of the alleged
perpetrators. If their behavior tends to result in the destruction of
things, e.g., destruction of a species of animals through over-hunting, then
the nature of those humans was "destructive" even if the humans were acting
innocently in a naive effort to feed themselves.
I'm not a fan of behaviorism but I can understand Diamond in those terms.
-gts
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Apr 22 2003 - 17:57:27 MDT