Although I can understand their argument and even see its merits, I take what I consider a balanced approach and draw from both schools of though. Basically, I'm an advocate of not handicapping yourself unnecessarily but realize that you may find yourself handicapped by circumstances. I try to stack the deck in my favor as much as possible and that entails carrying the right gear but also being able to make do without. One easy example is that my wilderness kit has both a Bic lighter and a backup fero rod but if I have to I can start a fire using one of the several primitive techniques I've practiced to the point of confidence.
I'm with you on this. It is important to be aware of alternative, more "primitive" techniques, because they will often come in handy. It adds more depth to your skill set and gives you alternatives when modern technology isn't available.
Lots of fairly objective studies of "primitive" technologies show that they are actually pretty effective. A freshly knapped edge on a chert or obsidian flake is often extremely sharp - in the case of obsidian, it is sharper than the edge on a steel tool - the drawback is that it is extremely fragile and resharpening is required after just a few uses. Resharpening is not a big deal if you know what you are doing. Stone axes are very effective at felling moderate size trees, but require entirely different motor habits from those employed with steel axes.
Of course, steel replaced stone rather quickly when it became available to groups the world over, so modern tech definitely has something going for it. So live with modern technology, but be aware of old ways. You can find the river with your GPS, or you can watch the flight of flocks of birds - both will get you there.
Previous Topic
Index
