In today’s society it may seem a little archaic to talk about hunters and farmers. Why consider these outdated societal methods of functioning and survival when the world is so advanced? Granted, the literal practices of hunting and farming don’t apply to the general population of the Western world anymore; both have been replaced by industrialism and consumerism. Nevertheless, the basic tenets of hunters and farmers continues to be sharply relevant to the individual, and the whole, whether literally realized or only metaphorically understood.
In the context of researching and explaining ADD/ADHD, author Thom Hartmann recognizes the manifestation of hunter characteristics in those diagnosed with the disorder. He suggests things psychologically classified as “impatience” or “distorted sense of time” could be viewed through a more appropriate lens, recognizing these people as naturally suited for a lifestyle that no longer exists; forced into a structure they will always struggle to break free from.
He further concludes these should be viewed as genetic propensities, evolutionary overflow, passed down from generations where skills and attributes determined how you would contribute to society; that those with a disposition for farming would farm, and those with a talent for the hunt would do just that. How else could they survive?
Imagine a scenario, a very long time ago, where these two distinct groups of people attempt the reverse, because the hunter believes it is more profitable to farm, and the farmer believes it is more honorable to hunt. Essentially, all would suffer. Because it isn’t a matter of adaptability. It’s the recognition that, while a farmer may be able to learn to hunt, and a hunter could very easily tend a farm, neither are built to thrive within a lifestyle that is contrary to their nature and range of ability. Barring complete disaster, it breeds a slow kind of contempt based on inadequacy.
Welcome to today’s society.
By in large, with the exception of philosophers and other forward thinkers, people don’t generally apply these principals anymore, or consider them when it comes time to decide which direction to take their lives — as though the decision itself had limitless potential. And that’s understandable; we do live in a society where innate talent and skills are secondary to the basest need for survival on one end, and a more sinister desire for wealth and perceived importance on the other. In all cases, people are clawing their way to the top of a hollow pyramid built out of money, where those who “make it” are just as empty and unsatisfied as those who do not. Because, for as long as the mark of success is relative to wealth and not merit, any achievement will only satisfy the superficial, individually. And it will never feed the whole.
We suggest a new era of hunters and farmers, applied relevantly to the needs of today’s society. A society where genetically recognized skills and attributes, and easily verifiable talents, would determine how an individual contributes to the whole. That we can collectively let go the notions of entitlement and limitless possibility, or the malady we’ll refer to as the prosperity of perception, and instead embrace what is within our own range of ability to do.
“Know thyself”, first and foremost, and understand the obligation you have to apply that knowledge accordingly.
Randy Julien May 17, 2014 at 1:56 am
Awesome article. The word that came into mind was Meritocracy as I read your last two paragraphs.
Doli January 9, 2016 at 11:25 pm
Basically, embrace who you are born as since it’s more efficient to specialize in your natural abilities and talents. It might be more beneficial overall, but what if one does not like what is given to them at birth or desires to become something else, something more? It’s fine if those people with ADD/ADHD want to pursue a lifestyle away from structure that modern day has created for them, but what about people who are born with certain skills, yet has a mentality to do something else unrelated. Though, I can see it does seem wasteful to not use those talents. But isn’t pushing people to do what they are born to do, despite there hopes and dreams, limiting them? Is it right to bound people to what they are genetically giving?
Doli January 9, 2016 at 11:45 pm
given*