Discussing the Olympics and our destiny, or "calling" yesterday brought up another view: what of the societies that exist with few goals that separate one from the other? There are fewer and fewer of these, although there are many where differentiation through skills is minimal - for instance, many who live in rural Africa or Asia have very little opportunity to excel beyond the roll of farmer or peasant. But let's take some more pristine examples - such as the people I lived with in the Venezuelan Amazon.
Among them, there was almost no way to differentiate and excel among women; among men, there were only two positions where one might be considered above the rest - the position of headman and that of shaman. Of my experience, the headman was also the most respected shaman, collapsing the two positions to one. And given that the headman was only the "head" of about 30 people, all of whom were closely related, the difference wouldn't be as noteworthy as among other societies. In fact, the headman still had to hunt and plant, and, in even in the time that I went, when where there was a possibility of acquiring a few industrial goods, the amount one could accumulate had to be limited, for movement in the dry season was the norm and carrying excess baggage unattractive. So even the "big man" of the group was only exceptional because of the prestige given him, and even then, if there was a dispute, the dissidents could simply leave and start their own village.
What, then, of a "calling?" There was no first place, no gold medal, no substantial wealth, and little in the way of gaining prestige and recognition accept through magical-healing practice. Is, then, the whole notion of being born for some purpose only an artifact of societies like our own that do have high levels of differentiation and upward mobility?
From our standpoint, there is an obvious answer - yes. However, there WAS differentiation, on a more subtle scale. There were men and women noted as being better hunters, gardeners and harder workers. Beyond that, they were sharply differentiated by personalities. Some were downright magisterial, commanding respect instantly, even from outsiders like me. Others were a little goofy, or jocular, or childish. Others had mean or violent streaks, both with their woman or women and with men. These were noted keenly as their "way," their spiritually given presence in the world that had little to do with nature or nurture, in their minds as well as ours (their nurture, or environment, both social and physical, were nearly identical). Their "way" was connected to various mythical beings or elements, such as the evil or good twin, the moon god, the snake and so on, giving each a facility with certain aspects of the environment. I did not know of it there, although it was probable, but many tribal people have spirit helpers or animals that serve as their reflection in the spiritual world, and help them (or harm them, if they violate one of their principles) in this world.
In other words, they are recognized as having spiritual (god- given) aspects that are reflected in their personalities and affinities, which might include certain gifts (eg, ability to hunt deer). They are, then, like us in their beliefs, with only one major difference that I can think of: traditionally, there was probably no concept of the idea that one had "wasted" one's gifts, as we have. If a man were lazy, that would simply be part of his aspect. What you were, you were. (they had no liquor or way of selling themselves for whatever purpose at that time. That may have changed). There was, then, no stress on advancement, the one true reflection on our different ideas about callings. But one could still hunt and farm and fish and make arrows with enthusiasm and skill.
And so we are all, according to popular shared belief, given certain aspects and natures from another plain; we all have, in our ways, a calling. But is our differentiation as a modern society - our idea of hard work and advancement - a good or an evil? Is it good to put most things aside and strive to become the best doctor, the best slalom skier, or the best businessman? Is such dedication a positive, or is it a psychosis or dark deviation? It is, after all, the hallmark of modernity, of all our terribly efficient wars as well as our tremendous knowledge and advancements in medicine and technology. Were we meant to simply "be" with our locally recognized gifts (and faults) of nature, or to excel, to become stars, to become masters of our calling? Is our greater world society today an aberration, a misuse of our gifts, or the culmination of them? In other words, is our difference in tune with the will of heaven, or is it hubris, an act analogous to the Satan of the Semitic religions' rebellion against God? Is our advancement, then, the product of holy dedication or ego worship? That, a thought for another day. FK
Among them, there was almost no way to differentiate and excel among women; among men, there were only two positions where one might be considered above the rest - the position of headman and that of shaman. Of my experience, the headman was also the most respected shaman, collapsing the two positions to one. And given that the headman was only the "head" of about 30 people, all of whom were closely related, the difference wouldn't be as noteworthy as among other societies. In fact, the headman still had to hunt and plant, and, in even in the time that I went, when where there was a possibility of acquiring a few industrial goods, the amount one could accumulate had to be limited, for movement in the dry season was the norm and carrying excess baggage unattractive. So even the "big man" of the group was only exceptional because of the prestige given him, and even then, if there was a dispute, the dissidents could simply leave and start their own village.
What, then, of a "calling?" There was no first place, no gold medal, no substantial wealth, and little in the way of gaining prestige and recognition accept through magical-healing practice. Is, then, the whole notion of being born for some purpose only an artifact of societies like our own that do have high levels of differentiation and upward mobility?
From our standpoint, there is an obvious answer - yes. However, there WAS differentiation, on a more subtle scale. There were men and women noted as being better hunters, gardeners and harder workers. Beyond that, they were sharply differentiated by personalities. Some were downright magisterial, commanding respect instantly, even from outsiders like me. Others were a little goofy, or jocular, or childish. Others had mean or violent streaks, both with their woman or women and with men. These were noted keenly as their "way," their spiritually given presence in the world that had little to do with nature or nurture, in their minds as well as ours (their nurture, or environment, both social and physical, were nearly identical). Their "way" was connected to various mythical beings or elements, such as the evil or good twin, the moon god, the snake and so on, giving each a facility with certain aspects of the environment. I did not know of it there, although it was probable, but many tribal people have spirit helpers or animals that serve as their reflection in the spiritual world, and help them (or harm them, if they violate one of their principles) in this world.
In other words, they are recognized as having spiritual (god- given) aspects that are reflected in their personalities and affinities, which might include certain gifts (eg, ability to hunt deer). They are, then, like us in their beliefs, with only one major difference that I can think of: traditionally, there was probably no concept of the idea that one had "wasted" one's gifts, as we have. If a man were lazy, that would simply be part of his aspect. What you were, you were. (they had no liquor or way of selling themselves for whatever purpose at that time. That may have changed). There was, then, no stress on advancement, the one true reflection on our different ideas about callings. But one could still hunt and farm and fish and make arrows with enthusiasm and skill.
And so we are all, according to popular shared belief, given certain aspects and natures from another plain; we all have, in our ways, a calling. But is our differentiation as a modern society - our idea of hard work and advancement - a good or an evil? Is it good to put most things aside and strive to become the best doctor, the best slalom skier, or the best businessman? Is such dedication a positive, or is it a psychosis or dark deviation? It is, after all, the hallmark of modernity, of all our terribly efficient wars as well as our tremendous knowledge and advancements in medicine and technology. Were we meant to simply "be" with our locally recognized gifts (and faults) of nature, or to excel, to become stars, to become masters of our calling? Is our greater world society today an aberration, a misuse of our gifts, or the culmination of them? In other words, is our difference in tune with the will of heaven, or is it hubris, an act analogous to the Satan of the Semitic religions' rebellion against God? Is our advancement, then, the product of holy dedication or ego worship? That, a thought for another day. FK
RSS Feed