Mixing
Humans returning to tribalism
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I'm working on setting in which a prison ship crashes on a unexplored/unknown planet, and due to infighting and environmental factors the prisoners return to tribalism at best or feral animals at worse. What I'm wondering is if this is realistic or even possible. How many generations would this take? I've read a bit about feral children, but a lot I find about them seems like conjecture and not to mention that they were completely isolated.
science-based society humans
asked 1 hour ago
treskTon
643
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I'm working on setting in which a prison ship crashes on a unexplored/unknown planet, and due to infighting and environmental factors the prisoners return to tribalism at best or feral animals at worse. What I'm wondering is if this is realistic or even possible. How many generations would this take? I've read a bit about feral children, but a lot I find about them seems like conjecture and not to mention that they were completely isolated.
science-based society humans
asked 1 hour ago
treskTon
643
From your question I understand that you do not want conjecture. Do you understand that most of the answers on this site are based on conjecture?
– dot_Sp0T
1 hour ago
I'm sorry, I don't think that I truely understood the meaning of the word conjecture. I thought it meant completely fabricated and without any baisis where as that's not the case. I'm completely fine with conjecture. Sorry again!
– treskTon
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
up vote
4
down vote
favorite
I'm working on setting in which a prison ship crashes on a unexplored/unknown planet, and due to infighting and environmental factors the prisoners return to tribalism at best or feral animals at worse. What I'm wondering is if this is realistic or even possible. How many generations would this take? I've read a bit about feral children, but a lot I find about them seems like conjecture and not to mention that they were completely isolated.
science-based society humans
asked 1 hour ago
treskTon
643
I'm working on setting in which a prison ship crashes on a unexplored/unknown planet, and due to infighting and environmental factors the prisoners return to tribalism at best or feral animals at worse. What I'm wondering is if this is realistic or even possible. How many generations would this take? I've read a bit about feral children, but a lot I find about them seems like conjecture and not to mention that they were completely isolated.
science-based society humans
science-based society humans
asked 1 hour ago
treskTon
643
asked 1 hour ago
treskTon
643
asked 1 hour ago
treskTon
643
asked 1 hour ago
treskTon
643
asked 1 hour ago
treskTon
643
643
From your question I understand that you do not want conjecture. Do you understand that most of the answers on this site are based on conjecture?
– dot_Sp0T
1 hour ago
I'm sorry, I don't think that I truely understood the meaning of the word conjecture. I thought it meant completely fabricated and without any baisis where as that's not the case. I'm completely fine with conjecture. Sorry again!
– treskTon
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
From your question I understand that you do not want conjecture. Do you understand that most of the answers on this site are based on conjecture?
– dot_Sp0T
1 hour ago
I'm sorry, I don't think that I truely understood the meaning of the word conjecture. I thought it meant completely fabricated and without any baisis where as that's not the case. I'm completely fine with conjecture. Sorry again!
– treskTon
1 hour ago
From your question I understand that you do not want conjecture. Do you understand that most of the answers on this site are based on conjecture?
– dot_Sp0T
1 hour ago
From your question I understand that you do not want conjecture. Do you understand that most of the answers on this site are based on conjecture?
– dot_Sp0T
1 hour ago
I'm sorry, I don't think that I truely understood the meaning of the word conjecture. I thought it meant completely fabricated and without any baisis where as that's not the case. I'm completely fine with conjecture. Sorry again!
– treskTon
1 hour ago
I'm sorry, I don't think that I truely understood the meaning of the word conjecture. I thought it meant completely fabricated and without any baisis where as that's not the case. I'm completely fine with conjecture. Sorry again!
– treskTon
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
The people involved in the Bounty Mutiny were able to settle into a tribal culture at generation 0, and just used help from indigenous for better settling.
True, a lot of them were killed during subsequent interactions with locals, but I think that is kind of normal for that environment (see also Melville's Typee).
Consider that a complex social organization requires dedicated people, and dedicating people to non resource harvesting task can only be done when there is surplus production. I don't think that hunter-gatherers can rely on surplus resources, and establishing agriculture on an unknown planet is going to take some generations at least.
So I would say that also in your case is perfectly realistic to expect a tribal organization from day 0, when the group starts struggling for surviving.
answered 1 hour ago
L.Dutch♦
65.2k20155305
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
These are not normal people, they're criminals. Low education, low morals and low self discipline in general. Most would be unable to survive if not organised and disciplined.
I would expect hard core groups to exist around gang leader types right from the start. But their focus would not be on peacefully trying to make a living. They would raid and kill each other in short order until one group had control of all the resources. Then given the demographic it's quite possible no one would survive long term. Or there was a strong ruthless and lucky leader who could pull it all together.
The best chance of survival would be if the prison officers maintained control, bloodshed would still ensue but they may outlast the rest and organise a living if they were ruthless enough.
The Bounty mutiny was ordinary people more or less, and of the core group they all ended up dead except one man who was lucky and ruthless enough to be the last man standing Not because they were short on resources, but because of struggles over ownership and once the killing starts, no one trusts anyone else.
Historically there have been many groups that have ended up settling successfully because they could not go home, some Viking groups for instance. But these were people with a wide range of skills who knew carpentry, metal working, smelting, animal husbandry, how to cultivate land and the advantages of working as a team. In essence these were well educated people in their own terms. Not criminals who know how to sell drugs.
answered 18 mins ago
Kilisi
11.8k12157
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
3
down vote
The people involved in the Bounty Mutiny were able to settle into a tribal culture at generation 0, and just used help from indigenous for better settling.
True, a lot of them were killed during subsequent interactions with locals, but I think that is kind of normal for that environment (see also Melville's Typee).
Consider that a complex social organization requires dedicated people, and dedicating people to non resource harvesting task can only be done when there is surplus production. I don't think that hunter-gatherers can rely on surplus resources, and establishing agriculture on an unknown planet is going to take some generations at least.
So I would say that also in your case is perfectly realistic to expect a tribal organization from day 0, when the group starts struggling for surviving.
answered 1 hour ago
L.Dutch♦
65.2k20155305
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
The people involved in the Bounty Mutiny were able to settle into a tribal culture at generation 0, and just used help from indigenous for better settling.
True, a lot of them were killed during subsequent interactions with locals, but I think that is kind of normal for that environment (see also Melville's Typee).
Consider that a complex social organization requires dedicated people, and dedicating people to non resource harvesting task can only be done when there is surplus production. I don't think that hunter-gatherers can rely on surplus resources, and establishing agriculture on an unknown planet is going to take some generations at least.
So I would say that also in your case is perfectly realistic to expect a tribal organization from day 0, when the group starts struggling for surviving.
answered 1 hour ago
L.Dutch♦
65.2k20155305
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
The people involved in the Bounty Mutiny were able to settle into a tribal culture at generation 0, and just used help from indigenous for better settling.
True, a lot of them were killed during subsequent interactions with locals, but I think that is kind of normal for that environment (see also Melville's Typee).
Consider that a complex social organization requires dedicated people, and dedicating people to non resource harvesting task can only be done when there is surplus production. I don't think that hunter-gatherers can rely on surplus resources, and establishing agriculture on an unknown planet is going to take some generations at least.
So I would say that also in your case is perfectly realistic to expect a tribal organization from day 0, when the group starts struggling for surviving.
answered 1 hour ago
L.Dutch♦
65.2k20155305
The people involved in the Bounty Mutiny were able to settle into a tribal culture at generation 0, and just used help from indigenous for better settling.
True, a lot of them were killed during subsequent interactions with locals, but I think that is kind of normal for that environment (see also Melville's Typee).
Consider that a complex social organization requires dedicated people, and dedicating people to non resource harvesting task can only be done when there is surplus production. I don't think that hunter-gatherers can rely on surplus resources, and establishing agriculture on an unknown planet is going to take some generations at least.
So I would say that also in your case is perfectly realistic to expect a tribal organization from day 0, when the group starts struggling for surviving.
answered 1 hour ago
L.Dutch♦
65.2k20155305
answered 1 hour ago
L.Dutch♦
65.2k20155305
answered 1 hour ago
L.Dutch♦
65.2k20155305
answered 1 hour ago
L.Dutch♦
65.2k20155305
65.2k20155305
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
These are not normal people, they're criminals. Low education, low morals and low self discipline in general. Most would be unable to survive if not organised and disciplined.
I would expect hard core groups to exist around gang leader types right from the start. But their focus would not be on peacefully trying to make a living. They would raid and kill each other in short order until one group had control of all the resources. Then given the demographic it's quite possible no one would survive long term. Or there was a strong ruthless and lucky leader who could pull it all together.
The best chance of survival would be if the prison officers maintained control, bloodshed would still ensue but they may outlast the rest and organise a living if they were ruthless enough.
The Bounty mutiny was ordinary people more or less, and of the core group they all ended up dead except one man who was lucky and ruthless enough to be the last man standing Not because they were short on resources, but because of struggles over ownership and once the killing starts, no one trusts anyone else.
Historically there have been many groups that have ended up settling successfully because they could not go home, some Viking groups for instance. But these were people with a wide range of skills who knew carpentry, metal working, smelting, animal husbandry, how to cultivate land and the advantages of working as a team. In essence these were well educated people in their own terms. Not criminals who know how to sell drugs.
answered 18 mins ago
Kilisi
11.8k12157
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
These are not normal people, they're criminals. Low education, low morals and low self discipline in general. Most would be unable to survive if not organised and disciplined.
I would expect hard core groups to exist around gang leader types right from the start. But their focus would not be on peacefully trying to make a living. They would raid and kill each other in short order until one group had control of all the resources. Then given the demographic it's quite possible no one would survive long term. Or there was a strong ruthless and lucky leader who could pull it all together.
The best chance of survival would be if the prison officers maintained control, bloodshed would still ensue but they may outlast the rest and organise a living if they were ruthless enough.
The Bounty mutiny was ordinary people more or less, and of the core group they all ended up dead except one man who was lucky and ruthless enough to be the last man standing Not because they were short on resources, but because of struggles over ownership and once the killing starts, no one trusts anyone else.
Historically there have been many groups that have ended up settling successfully because they could not go home, some Viking groups for instance. But these were people with a wide range of skills who knew carpentry, metal working, smelting, animal husbandry, how to cultivate land and the advantages of working as a team. In essence these were well educated people in their own terms. Not criminals who know how to sell drugs.
answered 18 mins ago
Kilisi
11.8k12157
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
These are not normal people, they're criminals. Low education, low morals and low self discipline in general. Most would be unable to survive if not organised and disciplined.
I would expect hard core groups to exist around gang leader types right from the start. But their focus would not be on peacefully trying to make a living. They would raid and kill each other in short order until one group had control of all the resources. Then given the demographic it's quite possible no one would survive long term. Or there was a strong ruthless and lucky leader who could pull it all together.
The best chance of survival would be if the prison officers maintained control, bloodshed would still ensue but they may outlast the rest and organise a living if they were ruthless enough.
The Bounty mutiny was ordinary people more or less, and of the core group they all ended up dead except one man who was lucky and ruthless enough to be the last man standing Not because they were short on resources, but because of struggles over ownership and once the killing starts, no one trusts anyone else.
Historically there have been many groups that have ended up settling successfully because they could not go home, some Viking groups for instance. But these were people with a wide range of skills who knew carpentry, metal working, smelting, animal husbandry, how to cultivate land and the advantages of working as a team. In essence these were well educated people in their own terms. Not criminals who know how to sell drugs.
answered 18 mins ago
Kilisi
11.8k12157
These are not normal people, they're criminals. Low education, low morals and low self discipline in general. Most would be unable to survive if not organised and disciplined.
I would expect hard core groups to exist around gang leader types right from the start. But their focus would not be on peacefully trying to make a living. They would raid and kill each other in short order until one group had control of all the resources. Then given the demographic it's quite possible no one would survive long term. Or there was a strong ruthless and lucky leader who could pull it all together.
The best chance of survival would be if the prison officers maintained control, bloodshed would still ensue but they may outlast the rest and organise a living if they were ruthless enough.
The Bounty mutiny was ordinary people more or less, and of the core group they all ended up dead except one man who was lucky and ruthless enough to be the last man standing Not because they were short on resources, but because of struggles over ownership and once the killing starts, no one trusts anyone else.
Historically there have been many groups that have ended up settling successfully because they could not go home, some Viking groups for instance. But these were people with a wide range of skills who knew carpentry, metal working, smelting, animal husbandry, how to cultivate land and the advantages of working as a team. In essence these were well educated people in their own terms. Not criminals who know how to sell drugs.
answered 18 mins ago
Kilisi
11.8k12157
edited 6 mins ago
answered 18 mins ago
Kilisi
11.8k12157
answered 18 mins ago
Kilisi
11.8k12157
answered 18 mins ago
Kilisi
11.8k12157
11.8k12157
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f126388%2fhumans-returning-to-tribalism%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
From your question I understand that you do not want conjecture. Do you understand that most of the answers on this site are based on conjecture?
– dot_Sp0T
1 hour ago
I'm sorry, I don't think that I truely understood the meaning of the word conjecture. I thought it meant completely fabricated and without any baisis where as that's not the case. I'm completely fine with conjecture. Sorry again!
– treskTon
1 hour ago