"'I've carried [a plated bronze disc] for a talisman. But the demons were too strong for it today.'" (p. 141)
If your luck is good, then your talisman works. If your luck is bad, then the demons are too strong for your talisman. Thus, there is no way to disprove either the efficacy of talismans or the power of demons. Unscientific thinking.
When Chee passed the sentries, they fingered charms and whispered incantations:
"True, the newcomers had not caused any trouble so far, and in fact promised great benefits. But demons are notorious liars." (pp. 138-139)
Newcomers who cause trouble are demons. Newcomers who do not cause trouble are lying demons. More unscientific thinking. However, here there is at least the possibility of a breakthrough. When they have overcome social resistance, the traders will bring great benefits, thus enabling some Ikranankans to think beyond their ingrained demonology. Some is enough for a start. Progress is neither easy nor straightforward but possible.
10 comments:
The locals have good reason for their way of thinking; their environment is constantly deteriorating, slowly but consistently.
That not only makes nature seem chaotic and hostile, it produces more intergroup competition -- desperate fights over shrinking resources. There's less reinforcement for cooperation.
"Me against my brother; me and my brother against my cousin; me, my brother and my cousin against the world."
That's a Middle Eastern saying from a society in a somewhat similar situation, and one that has noticeably low levels of overall trust and a lot of 'amoral familialism'.
Bad scene. Shows how being determines consciousness.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling and Paul!
I agree with you both. Steadily worsening conditions on the sunward facing side of Ikrananka would make intergroup competition more and more desperate.
I also agree that once the off planet traders can convince Ikranankan leaders that commerce with other worlds would be beneficial, that would help to calm their fears and paranoia.
Ad astra! Sean
Paul: it works both ways. Consciousness is part of, and can determine, being.
If there's low social trust, then you're a fool if you don't work off worst-possible-case calculations of how people will act. You will be robbed and betrayed constantly.
And that itself becomes a physical reality, which reinforces itself.
Ever noticed how Mediterranean architecture is centered around a courtyard, presenting a blank (and defensible) perimeter to the outside, excluding everyone outside a narrow circle?
That's not an accident.
To name one example, the Catholic Church (for reasons of its own) did its best to forbid cousin-marriage.
Over centuries, the practice died out in much of Europe.
This in turn increased individualism and decreased inward-looking "clan" consciousness.
Which in turn affected political, cultural and economic developments.
It works both ways. We make our own history but not in circumstances of our own choosing.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
I agree, in times and places where "social trust" is low, some degree of caution and even paranoia is merely prudent. We are seeing that lately in the US as high crime is encouraged by foolish and counterproductive policies. Provoking push back by the victims of those policies.
I agree, while the Catholic Church disliked cousin marriage, it tolerated such things among many ruling families from about 1500 onwards. Altho that now seems to have also mostly faded away.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean: if marriage has to be outside the forbidden degrees of consanguinity makes it more difficult to preserve intergenerational inheritance.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
I know. But too much marrying within the family can lead to tragic cases like that of poor Charles II of Spain. The downright incestuous marriages of the Spanish Habsburgs led to the concentrating of genetically related disorders of the kind which afflicted that unlucky king.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean: oh, that dispersal of fortunes is a feature, not a bug. It incentivizes innovation.
Post a Comment