Let's assume a tribe is discovered that had zero interaction with the rest of the world.

[howard112211]

And its culture is ancient, with a way of life that has undergone no change at all for centuries. And now let's also assume the culture contains some things that are totally inconsistent with our values, for instance elements of slavery, human sacrifice or something similar.

What is the morally correct way to deal with such a group of people? Should they be left alone and essentially ignored? Should they be treated as savages who need to be educated into modern life? Should there be some form of diplomatic relationship? Should such a relationship include efforts to persuade them to let go of elements of their culture that are contradictory to our values? Should we sell them Coca Cola?

I realize that in the present world this situation is kind of idealized, since in most parts of the world, some form of interaction has happened already long ago, and we are mostly dealing with the consequences of these interactions, rather than a completely undisturbed system. But philosophically this questions is still interesting.

I am asking because I struggle with this question myself. I grew up watching a lot of Star Trek, and used to think the "prime directive" is a good idea. However, I do realize that there are problems with this philosophy that become most evident when there are things such as widespread slavery involved.

I would like to read some opinions on this topic. I'll be leaving my desk now, but will have a chance to read the replies either later today or tomorrow.

[shraby]

1. What would happen is most of the tribe would die off

because of the contact with the new germs and virii. Their style of living would be the least of our worries.

[Deep13]

6. true. nt

[petronius]

2. I seem to recall a few months ago reading about a tribe in the Amazon that

was being treated this way - basically, the area was off-limits to anyone else for any reason. The kicker was that the tribe had dwindled to one man, who was living a solitary life in a big reserve...

[sinkingfeeling]

3. I'm probably one of the few that would say to leave them completely alone. Make no contact at all. I

believe people evolved into the 'belief' system we currently have, so over a long period of time whatever we disapprove of should evolve into something else. I have never understood how we have come to believe that 'our way' is the best or that our 'values' are the most moral.

[gateley]

21. I'm with you, and although the very idea of slavery breaks my heart, it's not my call.

I have no right to impose my beliefs and judgments on others. Except Republicans.

[Deep13]

4. I'd end the murder and slavery.

Just as people can advance in technology, medicine, law, literature etc., they can advance morally. While we as a society clearly have a lot to learn on that subject, it is just as clear that murder and slavery are wrong. Hopefully, they could teach the rest of us about living in a sustainable manner.

[hayu_lol]

9. About 30-35 years ago...

such a primitive tribe was discovered on one of the outlying islands in the Philippines.

Absolutely no contact with the outside.

[Deep13]

12. So any sustainablility lesson was completely ignored then.

We really have to work on our cultural arrogance.

[Xithras]

16. Actually, primitive tribes like that DO still exist.

There are only a handful left, but the Sentinelese of the Andaman Islands are an example. They regularly murder any outsider who dares to wander onto their island.

The missionaries and moralists would LOVE to "save" them, because they kill people, engage in odd social behaviors like group sex, and have a social structure that appears to place most of the power in the hands of the tribes women.

We've been able to observe them from a distance, and they've even allowed outsiders on boats to approach the island closely and are somewhat friendly if you stay on your boat, but the moment you touch their sand, they'll fill you with arrows.

[nashville_brook]

5. most star trek episodes were about "f*ck the prime directive"

Roddenberry hung out the PD as a decent enough ethic, and then developed narratives around the ethical ignoring of it.

[slackmaster]

28. One of my favorite PD violations is the episode about a civilization based on Chicago gangs

The cars were cool, and neither Kirk nor Spock knew how to use a clutch.

IIRC the title is "A Piece Of The Action".

[Nordmadr]

7. Like this...

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1226050.ece

[cleanhippie]

8. Its already happened, several times, in fact.

Look-up "cargo cult" for starters, for an in-depth look at how religion gets started...

Many tribes have been found in Papua New Guinea and Africa over the last 100 years that had no prior contact with the rest of the world. Many of those things you asked about were there, as were many things we find in our societies. One thing I took away from what I have read about this subject, is how QUICKLY missionaries, usually christian missionaries, moved in for the kill. They usually quickly westernized and "saved" these tribes, taking them from self-reliant albeit primitive tribes, to westernized, technology dependent, and usually very poor, people whose elders look around and say "what the fuck just happened?"

[plcdude]

15. Having lived in PNG

for a number of years what you have read is pretty much true for the general direction of the way things are going for them now. Some individual expatriates be they religious or not tried not to westernize but basic organizational policies whether they were from church headquarters, or the Australian government, or other business interests were focused on harvesting the resources both natural and human in exchange for the "cargo".

[ThoughtCriminal]

19. Cargo Cults

Now I understand how GOP economists think.

[Uben]

10. We only educate savages because....

...we want them to understand what we say when we lie to them and take their land.

[gateley]

20. Well said. nt

[RandomThoughts]

11. Omega Directive overules Prime Directive.

Although that directive is not explained in that episode.

Although not explaining it is explained in that episode.

Also prior contact can change the evaluation of prime directive.

Although that is a tv show.


However in more seriousness. Your question is the idea what if two different civilizations met, what would be the coarse of action if one thought they had a better idea. Like most things, there are two answers, either coercion without free will, or education with choice.

I believe in education. Including learning. For instance, some parts of a culture that a culture might think wrong would could be a bias of the other culture. And some things done wrong add variety to life if in moderation.

For instance, perfect security would not be that joyful for anyone, nor would perfect chaos. So somewhere in the middle, in moderation seems best.


There are some basic rules that make sense, rules applied back, where people set the rules for themselves based on how they treat other people. However with mercy for variation and to have a room to move. Also with ability to modify as a person learns. Sorta like an aggravated value of actions over some period of time weighted for nearer actions creating circumstances applied back.

Also it seems that different perceptions would be required for people to live in their own situation, while still in contact with other people. Which could explain how people can hear different things from same thing said.


The hardest thing about learning, is it includes a component of what is correct, and what is important also. So if some culture had something really great, but only by perspective of their learning over a long time, a new culture might not see it, and think it had no value. You see that alot in culture interactions around traditions. And sometimes cultures can have traditions that conflict, so how should that be resolved, rules applied back would be if someone wants to keep their traditions they should let others keep theirs. And if they want to teach why theirs is better, they have to learn what the other traditions are about. And the whole time figuring out what better really is.


Then again, I still don't have beer and travel money and many experiences, so seems those conditions of existence still have errors in them. Or I could be incorrect.

:shrug:


Also while evaluating what is better, you have to look at permutations over many actions. Some rationalize dark side with that, so it would also require a component of knowing the outcome of actions. Since many are tricked to do bad side thinking that is only way to a better result. Usually there is a path with more moderate actions.

For instance, tough love is often an example of longer thinking on that concept. But some can think over concepts of generations, and when doing that, an individual person loses justice in any form. So there are limits to permutations across many ripples. Since if some action hurt an individual, to make a latter generation better off, that would not be rules applied back to that person. So the scope is also important.

Although that comes from a MMO, I worked on in my mind for years and wanted to write some day, but have not been in a position to find the groups that make those things. The idea for the MMO comes from society, trying to model the best of society and interactions in society. Also using 'Foundation' idea in conceptual design, trying to model actual society. Then the game itself could be also used to further learn of society.

One of the things I probably will do after traveling and having a few beers, when material things are corrected, is find or start a company to make that game. Really has some great concepts not in other online games.

The 'Foundation' concept also helped me better understand, concepts of what is freed in one place is freed in another, and ideas of making heaven on earth, a form of synergy between heaven and earth even, where it would make sense that they change, grow, and shake, as even they would learn from the better of each. I find that a really deep concept, and also about advances in forms of governance and better societal concepts. Really deep stuff. Also fits the ideas of bending to justice, and also the conceptual machine itself changing as the needs of service change and as knowledge grows. But those come from years of reading scifi mostly.

[Ozymanithrax]

13. Culture shock would lead to the destruction of that tribe...

The act of first contact changes them. There is no way to stop well meaning missionaries, peace corps operatives, and people bent on abusing that tribe from increasing the rate of change. In a generation or two, they would no longer exist.

[Jim__]

14. I don't think there is a "right" answer to your question.

The "morally" correct way for us to deal with people is determined by our moral beliefs - beliefs, not knowledge. My personal preference is that we make and maintain some form of contact, but, allow them to develop over time with our contact having an effect, but, preferably, not any mandated effect.

[hunter]

17. The lost tribe that watches FOX news seems pretty resilient.

Seriously, you can't drag someone who believes the universe is 6000 years old, someone who believes homosexual relationships are sinful, someone who thinks Ronald Reagan was a great president, into the "modern" world.

In a certain sense we are all members of lost tribes. I think you have to view these things in light of human rights. Unfortunately current "modern society" seems to worry less about human rights than it does about untenable and unsustainable economic ideologies. Religious missionaries chasing souls are every bit as bizarre and destructive as business people chasing profits. We've merely traded one dominant death cult for another.

[AnArmyVeteran]

24. Has it been determined what species watches Faux Noise?

They aren't humans!

[TonyMontana]

18. The same as in Star Trek

The prime directive only applied to pre warp civilizations.

If this tribe you speak of somehow develops atomic weapons, then I'd be worried. Otherwise leave them be. Like the hundreds of tribes that live in the Amazon jungle. Brazil just leaves them the hell alone.

[DirkGently]

22. Truly leaving other cultures alone is a practical impossibility. So share your ethics, but ...

not so much in the "killing you into Christianity / Democracy / Capitalism-while-we-take-your-land / gold /oil-or-whatever-other-resources-of-value-you-may-have" way so popular with Western culture.

[AnArmyVeteran]

23. They should be left alone!

But unfortunately, people will study them or try to 'save them'. I'm sure missionaries from different religions would seize the opportunity to destroy their culture and teach them they are going to hell if they dont convert. They will teach them shame and guilt if they deviate from their religion's beliefs. They did it in Hawaii and many other places.

[COLGATE4]

26. Remember what they said: "The Missionaries came to do good

and they did real well".

[SlipperySlope]

25. What about the opposite?

Let's say we accept that a previously isolated tribe should have the right to be left without interference.

Does this create a special right for them? Do other people get this right if they choose to exercise it?

What if a group of people who are currently part of society decide that they want to reject society and now live without interference. Should they be allowed to do that?

[sinkingfeeling]

30. Somebody living in their own society without interference from 'foreigners' is not creating a

special right. And if a group living in one type of society want to reject that one and find another that will accept them (like a US citizen moving to a socialized country such as Sweden), they are trading one society or 'civilization' for another. If one could find a remote enough, unclaimed spot of Earth to set up one's own society or clan to live without interference from others, the only thing to stop them is the lack of such a place existing. In the real world, the group seeking to break away from their known society would probably have to engage in a war with the people who already occupy the land. People should be free to associate with others holding similar views, ethics, and worldviews and to reject that to which they are born. They could become hermits or they could relocate to a different part of the world. Many have sought isolation from 'society', most with limited success since many believe that only they have the moral answers to all questions and seek to impose their beliefs on others.

[SlipperySlope]

32. Why should the breakaway group have to move?

Imagine that you discovered a group of 150 people living on some remote BLM land somewhere in the western United States.

What if it turned out that those 150 people were part of a Native American tribe that had never encountered any outsiders before. Should that tribe be free to continue to live their lives as they see fit without outside interference?

Now, what if it turned out that those 150 people were just a group of war protesters who had rejected society and were living completely independently. Should they be free to continue to live their lives as they see fit without outside interference?

If we aren't giving the first group of people a "special right" then I think we have to treat both groups the same. They are there, they want to be left alone, and it doesn't matter how they came to be there.

[sinkingfeeling]

33. Of course we should treat both groups the same. However, neither

group could possibly exist (having never encountered any outsiders).

[thelordofhell]

27. We tend to leave them alone

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncontacted_peoples

[Hannah Bell]

29. there is such a tribe, more or less

The Sentinelese (also Sentineli, Senteneli, Sentenelese, North Sentinel Islanders) are one of the Andamanese indigenous peoples of the Andaman Islands, located in the Bay of Bengal. They inhabit North Sentinel Island which lies westward off the southern tip of the Great Andaman archipelago. They are noted for vigorously resisting attempts at contact by outsiders.

Most of what is known about Sentinelese material culture is based on observations during contact attempts in the late 20th century.

From 1967 on, the Indian authorities in Port Blair embarked on a limited program of attempts at contacting the Sentinelese, under the auspices of the Director of Tribal Welfare and anthropologist T. N. Pandit. These "Contact Expeditions" consisted of a series of planned visits which would progressively leave "gifts", such as coconuts, on the shores, in an attempt to coax the Sentinelese from their hostile reception of outsiders. For a while these seemed to have some limited success; however the program was discontinued in the late 1990s following a series of hostile encounters resulting in several deaths in a similar program practised with the Jarawa people of South and Middle Andaman Islands and because of the danger of introducing diseases.

In 2006, Sentinelese archers killed two fishermen who were fishing illegally within range of the island, and drove off the helicopter that was sent to retrieve their bodies with a hail of arrows.<7> To this date, their bodies remain unrecovered, although the downdraught from the helicopter's rotors at the time exposed the two fishermen, who had been buried in shallow graves by the Sentinelese.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentinelese_people

http://www.andaman.org/BOOK/reprints/goodheart/rep-goodheart.htm

[blues90]

31. If a people like this does exist , I hope they are never found

Let them be.