• hitmyspot@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 days ago

    Non tangible things are still real. Families are real.

    The creation of complex systems is uniquely human and is what allows development and progress.

    Without these systems, laws and things including incorporatng non human entities has pros and cons. Development of healthcare and increasing longevity and increased food production, sanitation and reduction in hunger are a benefit. War and genocide are a problem. However, wars still happened before the introduction of borders. See Norse vikings, Roman empire creation etc.

    • Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      They are inter-subjective realities. As opposed to subjective realities - the sky looks blue to me - and objective realities - the sky is blue because of the refraction of light and varies in color due to atmospheric conditions.

      • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Realities nonetheless.

        Laws exist because we say they do. Society and people follow patterns because of these laws. Abolishing these laws and borders would lead to societal breakdown without an alternative system to replace them.

        Families are also constructs, borne of genetic reproduction. however we now understand them to include marriage and adoption and blended families. All constructs. All legalized also.

    • mrdown@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      However, wars still happened before the introduction of borders

      The concept of borders did not exist yet but the earliest wars was definitely about territories control for accessing more natural resources . It’s basically the same

      https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/ancient-brutal-massacre-may-be-earliest-evidence-war-180957884/

      This implies that the resources the people of Nataruk had at the time were valuable and worth fighting for, whether it was water, dried meat or fish, gathered nuts or indeed women and children. This shows that two of the conditions associated with warfare among settled societies—control of territory and resources— were probably the same for these hunter-gatherers, and that we have underestimated their role in prehistory.

      • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yes, of course. However, look at even ancient Greece, and legends of war for troy about love. The concept is older than the concept of countries. War is always about resource allocation, of you include people as a resource, which they are on a societal level. The designation of borders and countries is also partly about resource allocation.