Critique of symbolic culture Primitivists view the shift towards an evermore symbolicculture (epitomized by virtual reality) as highly problematic in the sense that it separates us from a direct interaction. Often the response to this questioning is, “So, you just want to grunt?" This might be the desire of a few, but typically the critique is a look at the problems inherent with a form of communication and comprehension that relies primarily on symbolic thought at the expense (and even exclusion) of other sensual and unmediated means. The emphasis on the symbolic is a movement from direct experience into mediated experience in the form of language, art, number, time, etc. Primitivists argue that symbolic culture filters our entire perception through formal and informal symbols. It goes beyond just giving things names, and extends to having an entire relationship to the world that comes through the lens of representation. It is debatable as to whether humans are "hard-wired" for symbolic thought or if it developed as a cultural change or adaptation, but, say primitivists, the symbolic mode of expression and understanding is limited and its over-dependence leads to objectification, alienation, and a tunnel vision of perception. Many primitivists promote and practice getting in touch with and rekindling dormant or underutilized methods of interaction and cognition, such as touch and smell, as well as experimenting with and developing unique and personal modes of comprehension and expression. kudos to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-primitivism
i just learnt today that i have slight leanings towards anarcho primitivism. hah. i was reading thru this article and realised that it kinda echoed one of my former blog posts on communication. anw im damn bored at work. tt's why im updating my blog.
