The trouble was that I didn’t know how to go about it...

>most importantly the idea that primitive-era people were satisfied with their lives-

When was actual modern hunter-gatherers as references and they are usually satisfied with their lives.

Yes, people just starved all the time for the 300,000 years before they stopped being nomads and started civilisation.

Is funny that if he had died long ago, people would say things like "imagine what Kaczynski would think if he saw the internet", but if you think about it, future generations will say things like that

you aren't them
what makes you think you're them
stay in the matrix basedboy

Yes, some self control. Especially since living without a lot of technological elements actually makes your life easier. The harder part is living off the land, but even Ted didn't start off doing that immediately because it's not realistic, it's a long learning process.

>there are a lot of points he makes about primitive society that seem like he just pulled out of his arse
Like?
> it also seems like he views technological innovation as a fluke
I never got that impression at all. He also seems to have no issue with basic technology, obviously, just with the type of fast growth and proliferation needed to maintain and industrial technological society.

As per the "stoic death" thing I think he meant just dying relatively quickly of whatever disease and accepting it, which is true. Contrast that to people slowly dying and suffering over a period of years trying to "fight" diseases that they will never beat, like dementia for example. To be fair, this is partially the result of euthanasia and suicide being seen as negatives in our culture, partially.

He may have been referencing the fact that his father was diagnosed with terminal lung cancer and committed suicide, something he said he admired.

>you aren't them
>what makes you think you're them
The fact that modern humans have been the same on a biological level for 300,000 years and the only difference between me and them is knowledge and experience.

>I never got that impression at all.
he states that recent technological innovation was only possible under a unique set of circumstances- this might be true, but the way he talks about it makes me believe he sees it as "accidental" rather than inevitable. if it was inevitable then it would undermine his whole argument.
>He also seems to have no issue with basic technology
how basic? someone posted this in another thread, but the problem is that it's all or nothing. if you have fire, you get everything that comes with it. humans are not built the same as any other animal and i find it strange to expect people to behave like monkeys and not advance further.
>he meant just dying relatively quickly of whatever disease and accepting it, which is true.
do you seriously believe that the majority of people (let's say healthy adults or children, so not old people who are about to die) would be OK with contracting a painful disease that could kill them over the course of days, even in primitive times? this goes against any survival instinct. i think by stoic acceptance he means the complete inability to do anything despite in reality wanting to do something.

He specifically takes issue with the industrial revolution and industrial technology, specifically. Read the manifesto.

And he's not wrong about tech innovation needing luck and certain circumstances. Needing certain circumstances for something to happen isn't "accidental" and it's true that development has often happened with pure blind luck. That isn't at all contradictory to his argument. If you can find the passage where you have issue with this I'd like to see it. I'd say he sees it as a natural development that needs conscious effort to stop, hence why his idealized revolution would get rid of all traces of knowledge/history relating to technology (whether this is possible is another issue).

And no, most people wouldn't be happy to die, I never said that nor did he. But there's a difference between accepting the inevitability of death (hence why things like last rites, final confessions, last words and so on existed) and trying to prolong life for no real benefit, like keeping vegetables alive or suffering for decades trying "win the battle" against cancer or some other hopeless illness. Death will happen, this is a guarantee, to try to fight it in a hopeless circumstance as we do now is absolutely pointless and unnatural. Hence why there is more push recently for things like better palliative care and the right to euthanasia and suicide.

>"In the summer of 1969, at the age of 27, Mr. Kaczynski left Berkeley, determined to seek a simpler life in a remote area. [...] Living again at home, Mr. Kaczynski kept mostly to his bedroom. Awaiting word on his land application, he did nothing for more than a year. His parents urged him to get a job, not to make money but to give him something to do, to ease his mind. But the effort failed. Investigators who had access to letters Mr. Kaczynski wrote later said the parents' efforts were interpreted by their brooding son as unwarranted intrusions, pressure to conform to a world he hated."

Attached: ted1.jpg (480x360, 29K)

Now you can see why he's so popular with people on this site, being that he was a wizard NEET for most of his life.

nobody will see you anything more than those casual hippies in the woods

You make compromises.

Keep your internet usage to a minimum. Use it for research, knowledge and necessary communication.
Buy an old phone, not a smartphone, so you aren't tempted to go online whenever you're bored.
Find hobbies or jobs that are more in-touch with nature rather than dealing with machines.

It's practically impossible in the current year to do what he did unless you are rich and have enough money to set yourself up a house and a plantation in the middle of nowhere. Most people still have to work a job to get food. You can't just hunt for a living without any experience or knowledge. Unless you drink some alcohol to gain the balls and move to Siberia or Africa or some other shithole if you truly believe in what he says.

You make do with technology, the modern world is too dependent on it to cut yourself off completely. Limit yourself to what is absolutely necessary. Never self-indulge. Especially don't put your information out on the internet for all to see.

I admit I struggle a lot as well.

You do things just because other people see you do them?

Pathetic.

no the point is that you're no more 'tuned into' anything than those casual hippies
you think you could come to the conclusion of living in the woods by yourself nope you just saw the super based unabomber on pol one day and set out to imitate him

I had a desire to live in the woods or mountains a decade before I ever heard of the unabomber

Nobody is talking about hippies and this has nothing to do with them, and people have longed for independence and self sufficiency long before Kaczynski (or even Thoreau for that matter).

Stop posting him. Everyday a thread about him and nobody adds nothing new to the conversation

I know what you mean, user. I try to keep away, but I fail everytime. I feel this "need" toalways check different boards or youtube or whatever. I don't even have social media, but I'm addicted to the internet and I'm not sure how to stop. I get restless if I don't browse in a way. I want to read more books instead of anonymous posts. But maybe in time things will get better.

>I admit I struggle a lot as well.

Good luck, user! Hope you get away from the modern world.

Attached: 44E7F99900000578-4937170-image-a-4_1506813587212.jpg (634x939, 81K)

Reminder that there is no single piece of technology in history without the eventual emergence of all technology after.
Reminder that there is no concept of family without the eventual emergence of capitalism and government.

Evolution does not care what you think. It is greater than you. And that's why the greatest minds all consider it in their analysis of the world today. There is no such thing as a perfect world where the perfect amount of technology and civilization is permitted and maintained.

He was a math PhD whose professors called him a near-genius, and he taught at Berkeley in his 20s
Leaving that behind then waiting on land for a year doesn't make him "a wizard NEET for most of his life" you retard

He was and is a virgin, and he only officially worked for a short amount of time, spending the majority of his life (and note that that post did specify the majority of his life, not the year he spent waiting for a land permit) outside of work, education or training. He is, by definition, a wizard NEET and you might want to look those words up and then actually read the posts you are responding to before calling others retards, you retard.

>what is property tax
the absolute state of idealists

He spent twenty-five years living off the land in his cabin and the twenty-three years since in supermax. Neither of those are what anyone means when they use "NEET" as a pejorative and you know it. If he was a NEET, so is every subsistence farmer.

And again:
>NEET is an acronym that stands for "Not in Education, Employment, or Training". It refers to a person who is unemployed, not in school or vocational training.
That would absolutely apply to the majority of his life, so trying to bullshit with "but that's not what people mean!" is just plain incorrect. And yes, so are subsistence farmers, housewives and prisoners.

Stop using the fucking government definition of NEET.

No one on the fucking internet uses that definition. A NEET is a NEET, it's not an acronym on the internet it's a fucking title like Hooker or Pick Up Artist. Fuck back where you came from.

>what matters in communication isn't what people mean, but the strictest possible adherence to dictionary definitions
You cannot say something like this without being on the spectrum. I don't even mean it in an insulting way, it's not your fault, but this is a profoundly autistic way to see things and you shouldn't attempt to enter into these arguments without realizing that.

how will you practice sanitation in dirty ol woods? how will you wash hands?

>the idea that primitive-era people were satisfied with their lives- i am not denying that the modern world places a lot of artificial stress on people (more people are depressed) but the problem is the people, no matter what era, are NEVER satisfied
how can you possibly know how satisfied the average person was in their respective era of history?
they didn't do a census or studies or anything back then so it's impossible to know and that's why i think its beyond retarded when people say shit like
>this is the greatest time to be alive in human history

we don't fucking know how happy people were back then

Reminder to fucking cite your sources.

His fans don't actually care about that, they just like the killing leftist thing.

you're fucking retarded.

what am i missing

You see, you're like Wittgenstein.

Minus the intelligence.

>infinite porn

A well

based NEET holy shit

how do you dig a well on your own
how will you wash hands after fucking around multiple days with the dirt, some of it will stick and will not wash away with just water? there will be bacteria in it

Oh no, the horror of dirt on your hands, jesus christ you pussy you don't die from muddy hands

i mean you could get stomach pains and shit all the time
what is your solution
>inb4 just buy soap etc from a nearby store

What he means by stoic death is simply being connected with the ongoings of the world and appreciating its cycles and eventualities. Today, and several generations past, we are not connected to anything but our infantile (simplistic) fictions in virtual space. Old people grasp for life and power without handing the reins to the youth, they do not understand this cycle of things, they don't understand life or death, and are very afraid of it. They have no qualms about destroying the world for a few extra years of comfort. That is how vapid and disconnected humanity is today.

Also people are only dissatisfied today because the system, the economy and culture, is fundamentally dysfunctional. In addition to that, everyone is fed ideas and desires to make them perpetually grasping and unsatisfied. Primitives know how to both live and die fully, and because their system is a generational product honed and robust, and they are not fed damaging ideas, they are very much content. At best their incontentedness would extend to wanting a certain woman as a mate or wanting seniority and the power that it grants. If you think they will inevitably jump off the deep end and be insatiable then you're merely poisoned by the modern world and projecting.

>i mean you could get stomach pains and shit all the time
What the fuck are you on about you retard. You won't get sick from playing with some dirt and if you do you deserve to be sick. No need for a well either, all you need is some running water or underground water that surfaces naturally (the original meaning of a well). Only use a well for drinking, use running water downstream for washing and further upstream for drinking. There are various hygiene practices you can employ. Depends on your environment and culture. Here's an extremely common one throughout time and place.
youtube.com/watch?v=j30HOdWJ5gE

Great posts, the more you read the more posts like this have a way of encapsulating everything in a few lines. You're absolutely correct

>He specifically takes issue with the industrial revolution and industrial technology, specifically.
that doesn't refute my point about some technology bringing about more technology. if you go back to pre-industrial times, someone eventually will discover the factory, long distance communication, etc.
>is idealized revolution would get rid of all traces of knowledge/history relating to technology
this almost seems counter-intuitive because people would have to again, rediscover the dangers of technology.
thanks for proving my point. how can you know? although when i say "satisfied' i mean in all aspects of living, including physically satisfied.
now you're talking about
>being connected with the ongoings of the world and appreciating its cycles and eventualities.
this is a cultural things that varies across groups of people and eras. you can "appreciate life's cycles" while also having some degree of technology. for wanting to convert to pre-industrial times, this is a relatively weak benefit.
>At best their incontentedness would extend to wanting a certain woman as a mate or wanting seniority and the power that it grants
you still prove my point. humanity is destined to be dissatisfied. there is no perfect way of living. no utopia exists. let's assume this is the """"only"""" problem with primitive era peoples. some man would eventually realize that if you plant certain seeds of plants you can predict their harvest and now have dependable food storage, which is good for several reasons. now many people want to join your group and he has a lot of mates to choose from. people will always want to seek solutions to dissatisfaction. what you really want is a philosophical type of revolution, which won't happen for as long as people are on earth.

eww, what makes you think you're not gonna just get ground into organic paste? AI doesn't have a rape instinct, they're just gonna torture you.