Taming the Savages

[DuLake]

Every year my college (a private Christian affair) has a week devoted to missions, and last time around I recall one of the speakers mentioning that they'd been kicked out of certain areas of the Amazon, because they didn't want the missionaries to interfere with the tribes customs; they wanted to preserve this strain of civilization.

This kind of got me thinking recently. Despite my institution of choice of schools, I'm an atheist, and truly couldn't care less whether or not the gospel is spread (though I'm sure a few peoples opinions differ here, and I'd love to hear from you too, of course), though, as a humanist, I can see the need for medicine, shelter, etc that may also interfere with the native customs.

So my question is: Do we have an anthropological duty to withhold aid from these sorts of peoples in order to preserve them (like a human museum almost)? Is it ethically wrong to interfere with their way of life, and, in turn, replace it with one we deem better? On the contrary, is it wrong to allow people to die by withholding technology or education in order to preserve such a society? To sum it all up, what would you do if you were asked to deal with them?

Just thought it might be an interesting, and slightly different, prompt for discussion. I'll check back later on and add my thoughts, but I want to see a few other people's ideas before I join in.

[† Ferocia Coutura]

We should help only when asked to help. It is our duty to help, but it is not our duty to interfere.

[shyguysteve]

Just help them, coexist with them.

Don't change them or enforce your ideals on them. Just let them be them. Things change of course but you shouldn't force change it should just happen.

Because they remained separate from the 'modern world' doesn't mean they couldn't find any uses for what the modern world has to offer them.

I don't like treating certain things as if the value of the said things are so great you must lock it up forever.

[Monad-Gnostis]

Every year my college (a private Christian affair) has a week devoted to missions, and last time around I recall one of the speakers mentioning that they'd been kicked out of certain areas of the Amazon, because they didn't want the missionaries to interfere with the tribes customs; they wanted to preserve this strain of civilization.

This kind of got me thinking recently. Despite my institution of choice of schools, I'm an atheist, and truly couldn't care less whether or not the gospel is spread (though I'm sure a few peoples opinions differ here, and I'd love to hear from you too, of course), though, as a humanist, I can see the need for medicine, shelter, etc that may also interfere with the native customs.

So my question is: Do we have an anthropological duty to withhold aid from these sorts of peoples in order to preserve them (like a human museum almost)? Is it ethically wrong to interfere with their way of life, and, in turn, replace it with one we deem better? On the contrary, is it wrong to allow people to die by withholding technology or education in order to preserve such a society? To sum it all up, what would you do if you were asked to deal with them?

Just thought it might be an interesting, and slightly different, prompt for discussion. I'll check back later on and add my thoughts, but I want to see a few other people's ideas before I join in.

I think we should just let them do what they gotta do.