Self-sufficiency

[R7ehr]

Does anyone hold to a moral position on "self sufficiency?"

It is in conflict with Christianity.

[barnhart]

Does anyone hold to a moral position on "self sufficiency?"

It is in conflict with Christianity.

And maybe with itself as well.

[Szdfan]

I think it’s fine if people want to try homesteading and work towards self-sustainability. But I also think that true self-sustainability where you don’t have to rely on anyone else at all is a fantasy and not possible.

[Neto]

I think it’s fine if people want to try homesteading and work towards self-sustainability. But I also think that true self-sustainability where you don’t have to rely on anyone else at all is a fantasy and not possible.

If you are interested in seeing someone TRY to live alone, in a survival situation, check out this show.

https://www.history.com/shows/alone

Many, if not most of the people who accept this challenge (for a prize of 500 grand) are loners who think they don't need people. But one of the most frequent reasons they CHOOSE to leave the isolated place where they are (giving up the chance to win the prize money) is the need for social interaction. I know that a group of people can live in isolation without outside contact, because I know of isolated people groups in the Amazon that have been doing that for decades. But doing it as an individual is a different question. (For a limited time, like a week or two, or even "40 days and 40 nights" might reap spiritual blessings, and I may do it some time, who knows? On the other hand, I've experienced social withdrawal when out in the village 'alone' for just 3 or 4 days. I already knew the Banawa language, and the people were there all around me, but I was really missing my family.)

[barnhart]

I would guess very few, left truly alone, are capable of survival much less health and flourishing. We are hive creatures more like ants or bees than cats. It seems to me every step up to a larger political unit brings more material prosperity, a family unit is better than being alone, a tribe is better than a family, a village is better than a tribe and so on.

[JohnH]

I would guess very few, left truly alone, are capable of survival much less health and flourishing. We are hive creatures more like ants or bees than cats. It seems to me every step up to a larger political unit brings more material prosperity, a family unit is better than being alone, a tribe is better than a family, a village is better than a tribe and so on.

By that standard, an empire is best of all.

[Neto]

I would say that it stops 'getting better' (socially) when the population gets to the point that the members of the society no longer know everyone else, and also no longer depend on the others in some way or another. (That is, when there are 'total strangers' within the group.)

[JohnH]

I would say that it stops 'getting better' (socially) when the population gets to the point that the members of the society no longer know everyone else, and also no longer depend on the others in some way or another. (That is, when there are 'total strangers' within the group.)

That would be a rather small size, right about the Dunbar number, right?

[barnhart]

I would say that it stops 'getting better' (socially) when the population gets to the point that the members of the society no longer know everyone else, and also no longer depend on the others in some way or another. (That is, when there are 'total strangers' within the group.)

That is quite possible, my observations were based on material health not social or spiritual health.

[KrisKramer]

Does anyone hold to a moral position on "self sufficiency?"

It is in conflict with Christianity.

I agree. Jesus taught sharing. Feeding the 5,000. Taking care of your neighbors. The good Samaritan.