Primitive Man As Philosopher (Hardcover)

Primitive Man as Philosopher by Paul Radin, Ph. D. Research Fellow of Yale University and sometime Lecturer in Ethnology in Cambridge University editor of Crashing Thunder, the Autobiography of an American Indian with a foreword by John Dewcy Professor of Philosophy in Columbia University New York and London D, Appleton and Company 1927 COPYRIGHT, 1927, D. APPLETON AND COMPANY PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO MY WIFE PREFACE When a modern historian desires to study the civilization of any people, he regards it as a necessary preliminary that he divest himself, so far as possible, of all prejudice and bias. He realizes that differences between cultures exist, but he does not feel that it is necessarily a sign of inferiority that a people differs in customs from his own. There seems, how ever, to be a limit to what an historian treats as legitimate difference, a limit not always easy to determine. On the whole it may be said that he very naturally passes the same judgments that the majority of his fellow countrymen do. Hence, if some of the differences between admittedly civil ized peoples often call forth unfavorable judgments or even provoke outbursts of horror, how much more must we expect this to be the case where the differences are of so funda mental a nature as those separating us from people whom we have been accustomed to call uncivilized. The term uncivilized is a very vague one, and it is spread over a vast medley of peoples, some of whom have comparatively simple customs and others extremely com plex ones. Indeed, there can be said to be but two charac teristics possessed in common by all these peoples, the absence of a written language and the fact of originalposses sion of the soil when the various civilized European and Asiatic nations came into contact with them. But among all aboriginal races appeared a number of customs which undoubtedly seemed exceedingly strange to their European and Asiatic conquerors. Some of these customs they had never heard of others they recognized as similar to observ vli viii PREFACE ances and beliefs existing among the more backward mem bers of their own communities. Yet the judgments civilized peoples have passed on the aborigines, we may be sure, were not initially based on any calm evaluation of facts. If the aborigines were regarded as innately inferior, this was due in part to the tremendous gulf in custom and belief separating them from the con querors, in part to the apparent simplicity of their ways, and in no small degree to the fact that they were unable to offer any effective resistance. Romance soon threw its distorting screen over the whole primitive picture. Within one hundred years of the dis covery of America it had already become an ineradicably established tradition that all the aborigines encountered by Europeans were simple, untutored savages from whom little more could be expected than from uncontrolled children, individuals who were at all times the slaves of their passions, of which the dominant one was hatred. Much of this tradi tion, in various forms, disguised and otherwise, has persisted to the present day. The evolutionary theory, during its heyday in the iSyos and Sos, still further complicated and misrepresented the situation, and from the great classic that created modern ethnology Tylors Primitive Culture, published in 1870 future ethnologists were to imbibe the cardinal andfunda mentally misleading doctrine that primitive peoples represent an early stage in the history of the evolution of culture. What was, perhaps, even more dangerous was the strange and uncritical manner in which all primitive peoples were lumped together in ethnological discussion simple Fuegians with the highly advanced Aztecs and Mayans, Bushmen with the peoples of the Nigerian coast, Australians with Poly nesians, and so on. PREFACE ix For a number of years scholars were apparently content with the picture drawn by Tylor and his successors...