The "Stone Age"

Visions of the Rewilding Renaissance Common Misconceptions
#1

Urban Scout posted in another thread:

Rewilding does not recognize the term "stone age" as anything but civilized mythology to make indigenous people look like a "thing of the past." That the destiny of humans progresses through time in terms of technological advancement. There is no such thing as the "stone age" outside of civilization.

Aside from the fact that “Stone Age” is part of the civilized myth of Progress (and I use “myth” in its true sense) – “Stone Age” is a silly term. Wood Age, Rawhide Age, Reed Age, Bone Age, Plant Fiber Age, Bark Age, Clay Age, Antler Age, etc. etc, would make more sense, because stone is a minor survival material compared to what is given by Plant Relatives and Animal Relatives and the clay and mud of the Earth. We might as well call modern civilization the “Cardboard Age” or the “Nylon Age.”

I have even heard the word “Stone Age” applied to Amazonian tribes such as the Waorani who do not use stone for anything at all (stone being hard to find in the rainforest, and other materials being so abundant).

And modern civilization uses way more stone than any so-called “Stone Age” peoples, since it is an essential ingredient in the cement (in the form of sand) and concrete that it uses so much.

So when people say we are talking about “going back to the Stone Age” we can tell them there is no such thing as the “Stone Age.” It is the Redcedar Age, the Tule Reed Age, the Willowshoot Age, the Deerskin Age, the Porcupine Quill Age, the Pine Resin Age, the Palm Frond Age, the Birchbark Age, the Sedge Root Age … really the age of direct and unmediated participation with all our relations.

#2
We might as well call modern civilization the "Cardboard Age" or the "Nylon Age."

Or the glue age, as I remember from my readings of Daniel Quinn. “Sure, we use glue, but it’s no more central to our lives than stones are to theirs.” That passage was so enlightening to me years ago.

Though I’d personally go with “Cement Age”. That stuff is EVERYWHERE. Or “Trash Age”. Maybe the “Plastics Age”.

#3

For me it’s not so much the “stone” part (which is totally stupid) but the “age” part.

To put our culture in terms of “ages” marked toward progress. It places the passing of time on a linear chart, rather than a cyclical one. It’s stairs up a hierarchy, not phases of the moon. Now if we looked at cultural changes as phases, like those of the moon, I’d probably feel fine about it because it implies that we will experience the same phase again in the future, rather than ‘progress’ towards a new, better, higher phase or age on the hierarchy of expansion and genocide.

As a side note: I’m sure that our culture calls it stone age because wood and plant fibers turn back into the land much faster than stone. In terms of archeology, it would seem that stone tools were mostly what we have to study those cultures so it may appear that was the central part.

#4

I suggest you go check out the Rewilding Primer and at least read the 30 theses for a basic understanding of what this is about.
After reading that, come back with any other questions and we’ll do our best to answer them.

#5

Was I just censored? Wow, that blows my mind.