Thom Hartmann proposed a hypotheis about the origins of ADHD..though it did not bode well in the scientific community. This theory states it may be a form of adaptive behavior. For many thousand years, humans were nomadic hunter gatherers. But this standard changed with the development of an agriculture style culture; people worldwide become farmers.

During this time and up to today, some people retained the ADD(HD) gene.

"These individuals have the ability to rapidly shift their focus and external attention and to hold multiple trains of thought. This causes difficulties when they must live and work in cultures in which "farming" -well planned, predictable, organized and repetitive behaviors- are typical."

Thom Hartman is no scientist. He is the Father of a child with a form of ADD. As he watched his child interact, learn and grow, he developed this Hunter vs Farmer Trait Theory. This is just a brief overview of his hypotheis.

Ok Adder's, what do you think of this hypotheis. Is there any revelence to its' position? If so, share with us. If you think His position is not factual, share your thoughts.

Citation: wikipedia/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_vs._farmer_theory
Also: http://www.adda-sr.org/Spanish/hunterfarmer.htm

months ago seen another article about this theory, unknown source. If I run accross it, I'll edited it into this thread.

Ah, one of my favorite items.

I actually like this idea, though it is probably not very likely to be true in its literal form. Quite a few ADD quirks may actually be detrimental to effective hunting(lack of attention to detail for example) but a great many others are a distinct benefit.

I actually observe a lot of these quirks in myself:

- Keeping mind and senses always open to deal with new factors from the outside(easily distracted, inadvertent eavesdropping on conversations, why do ADD eyes wander a lot)
- Making sure to always have a good overview of the environment (public places, traffic situations[I look far ahead in traffic])
- Hyperfocus on things perceived as important
- Switching off if there is nothing going on, to conserve energy. No energy for mundane tasks
- Retain flexibility in planning, don't be dogmatic
- Dislike of outside sources of distractions such as large groups, shopping mall, busy kids, noisy environments. "hunting alone"

actually...

http://www.northwestern.edu/newscenter/stories/2008/06/ariaaltribe.html

I see it as a useful metaphor and that is about it. Barkley took a pretty good swipe at this theory and I can't fault him on his reasoning...although several members took offense before. I'm all for calling a spade a spade...that could be my ADHD. Here is the quote, "Here’s storytelling about AD/HD. AD/HD children are just leftover hunters from the Pleistocene era of human evolution and there’s really nothing wrong with them. They’re just the good old hunters from our caveman days being forced to live in a world of farmers and education. That is one view of AD/HD that became very popular over the last decade and that is not a theory. That is a silly little idea for building self-esteem in AD/HD children, and I don’t happen to believe that you should be building self-esteem by lying to people, by practicing small deceits, by creating little stories about the origin of a disorder so that you can act as if it wasn’t a disorder. From that view, there’s nothing wrong with AD/HD. It’s the environment that’s the problem. AD/HD is just a mismatch between little hunters where hunting is no longer needed by the environment. Let me tell you something. The last person I ever want to go hunting with is an AD/HD individual off their medication".

I view it as an entertaining perspect.

Period.


tc

mctavish23

(Robert)

"Here’s storytelling about AD/HD.They’re just the good old hunters from our caveman days being forced to live in a world of farmers and education."

This about sums up my thoughts on it as well. Just a trick to help with self-esteem but did nothing in itself to help when I diagnosed and was researching about ADD.

That being said, he does have a book out, ADD Success Stories, I'd recommend reading because it's got numerous tips/workarounds other ADDers wrote about to help deal with their ADD.

He does touch on the "ADD hunter" story a bit, but I just ignore that part of the book. :D

Sometimes, it's scary to think how short my attention span is with ADHD.

However, I absolutely suck at Counter-Strike, but otherwise have impeccable hand/eye coordination, so there's no way I have some sort of hunting trait.

Entertaining, but certainly untrue; However, there has to be some sort of explanation, because if we revert ourselves into our primitive caveman counterparts, how would ADD affect us on a daily basis, as opposed to it being disasterous in the society we live in today?

- Glen

Generally, I think it is a bit silly - or simplistic. But it isn't totally unreasonable. In the end, what does it mean to individuals?

One thing is, people should recognize their own individual strengths and their own positive characteristics. For ADD'ers that's often difficult, as most of our lives we've been living with something of a handicap and struggling to deal with it.

Second, it is worthwhile to realize that we need to be responsible (to cope properly) and live in the present world, but that we shouldn't feel that we need to conform completely - that we should keep an eye open toward finding pursuits and environments and relationships where we can best succeed.

This hunter/farmer narrative may help some people connect with that. It probably won't mean retuning to the African veld, but its a refreshing point of view.

For me, I don't much want to take a set of characteristics that someone else has come up with (along with reasons for "why") and then try to map myself to that. It's not anywhere near to something that I would share with other people to "explain me". It's just a home-made theory, of sorts.

****

There is a biological cause behind ADD, of course, and it is genetic.

I actually think that over time many traits that are generally considered "personality" will be traced back to genetics - not completely, of course, but as being a foundation for different characteristics.

That list of characteristics may be pretty long and will probably be a bit surprising in terms of the subtle traits that have a genetic factor. Just my opinion...

I really like the hunter/farmer theory and here's why.

My brain is not necessarily better or worse than anyone elses. It's just different. It needs a lot of fuel and it takes a lot of work to keep it functioning. It's either going 100% and laser sharp or it's drifting, foggy, and disoriented.

But here's the thing. If I'm working on something that captures my imagination in an area I'm competent in (and people acknowledge that), I'm like a bloodhound on the scent. I'll forget to eat, drink, and sleep and I'll be 100% the entire time. On the other hand, if it's something that is boring, I'm bad at (and people tell me so) then I'll never get close to even 10%. My brain is completely gone.

It's interesting because many of the farmers/ranchers/cowboys I know are either diagnosed or undiagnosed ADHD. Others, that may or may not be ADHD still have a whole lot of the traits. And yes, most do quite a bit of hunting (whaddya know? unmedicated!). I have a gut feeling that Barkley has never been hunting -- especially with guys like these... I can say for sure, if I'm ever in a sticky situation (or hunting) I want these guys around. They're likely to do just what's needed and they're not going to miss.

So, I don't have anything against Barkley although I do like the hunter concept. His statement quoted above irked me to no end so I thought I'd go over it. Realized, it's not what he's saying... it's the false logic and superiority...

So just because...

That is one view of AD/HD that became very popular over the last decade and that is not a theory.

Whether or not it's a theory is obsolete. At one point in time the theory of evolution was not a theory. Now it is a theory, whether you personally believe in evolution or not. (I don't btw)

That is a silly little idea for building self-esteem in AD/HD children, and I don’t happen to believe that you should be building self-esteem by lying to people, by practicing small deceits, by creating little stories about the origin of a disorder so that you can act as if it wasn’t a disorder.

I like this little bit of false logic. First, "silly little idea" establishes his superiority and that this is something to be made fun of. This plays to the ego -- no one wants to believe a silly-little-idea-made-for-little-kids... Second, no one believes you should build self-esteem by lying. The statement has a false ending. If you don't believe you should lie to build self esteem, then this "silly little idea" is a "small deceit"... "creating little stories"...

From that view, there’s nothing wrong with AD/HD. It’s the environment that’s the problem.

ALL organisms have a range of tolerance. All people have a range of tolerance. People with ADHD have a different range of tolerance than most people. So yeah, nothing's wrong with having a different range of tolerance. But this must be recognized, accepted, and worked with. I am empathic and will unconsciously take on the emotions of everyone around me. I have to guard against this and be aware of this. Otherwise, I'll be flooded with negative energy when a negative person comes into the room. There is no problem per se. There's nothing wrong with me. There's nothing wrong with the environment necessarily. But I must take care and be aware so I'm not physically and emotionally drained.

AD/HD is just a mismatch between little hunters where hunting is no longer needed by the environment.

I like the use of the word "little" here again. This biting sarcasm is starting to look a lot like defensiveness. And I do believe "hunting" is greatly needed -- especially now. There are those who will show up, put in 8 hours, and go home and forget about it. There are others who will never be satisfied unless giving 100% mentally, physically, and emotionally. Both are needed.

Let me tell you something. The last person I ever want to go hunting with is an AD/HD individual off their medication.

And this is the statement that got me started. Like I said, I have my doubts that he's a hunter and if I were ever in trouble, in a sticky situation, hunting, or cowboying, I want ADHD people around, medicated or not.

Heck the other day... ok, it wasn't hunting... just moving some heifers. We were with these idiots who wanted to be told what to do every step of the way, who followed instructions blindly (not thinking for themselves), and thus made the job 10 times harder and longer than it needed to be. It's because they weren't reading the cows. Yes, you need to know where you're going and what you're doing. But you need to get things set up so the cows want to go where you want them to go. Then, when you're actually moving them, you take your instructions from the cows -- from the group. You gotta be reading them. You gotta know which one will try to make a break for it. You gotta know where she's thinking about heading before she starts. You gotta know just where to stand so they stay where you want but w/o stressing them. When you know a cow wants to go where you don't want her to go, you gotta know where to move and how much to move. Enough to stop her before she starts. Not enough to scare her/spook the group. You gotta know whether you need to barely raise your hand from your side or whether to start yelling and flapping your arms.

Part of this is just being around animals. Most of it though is being aware of EVERY little thing. Hearing/seeing everything and knowing what's going to spook them before it happens.

I have ADHD and I would be a TERRIBLE hunter. First of all, I would lose my hunting tools because I have a terrible memory and tend to misplace things. I am also the type who would daydream and get eaten by a gorilla. Or I would get distracted by something else and then forget what I was supposed to be doing in the first place.

"Ooooh that tree looks fun. I'm going to climb the tree and hang out and enjoy the scenery."
*Walking back home four hours later*
"Oh what was I supposed to be doing? Oh crap, I don't have any dinner!"

I think its an appropriate way of illustrating the idea that its the environment that makes adders seem "abnormal"....it doesn't have to be taken litterally

The last person I ever want to go hunting with is an AD/HD individual off their medication.

That gave me a chuckle.

Keep in mind, ADHD-ers today live in a world that is very mentally exhausting. It may not have been that way in pre-industrial ages, where education was less valued.

I think its an appropriate way of illustrating the idea that its the environment that makes adders seem "abnormal"....it doesn't have to be taken litterally

ADHD
- a contextual disorder

forum thread - contextual disorder
(http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=302231#post302231)
forum thread - Hunter/Farmer theory
(http://www.addforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=13134#post13134)
both
- very long threads.

( ... ... ... just in case it helps)

Whether or not hunter/farmer is a plausible idea or not, this is the way I see it:

A long time ago nature(a.k.a. evolution) tried out a very small mutation.
As it is most such mutations get erased rapidly because they are less fit than the original. But, for some reason, this one survived to this very day.

Why?

Anyone?

Why?

Anyone?

Diversity maintenance of coarse

Diversity maintenance of coarse

- regression to the mean, meaning striving towards diversity to the tune of a perfect normal distribution -

- in this current world we have a few very very rich people and plenty of very very poor people -
the range between richest and poorest will be greater than the range we'd observe if a histogram of financial worth described a normal distribution -
- though
(and importantly) -

despite the range in the former scenario (current society) being larger --
- far greater diversity is observed in the latter (a future society which won't be long in coming)

as we watch on as banks which push inequality 'crash and burn' themselves alive through their own bare/naked greed)

too late to be rescued -
the banking fools are to far gone to be re-oriented towards fair practice -
how they must enjoy their failures being rewarded -

perhaps making the destitute whose houses they repossess all the more sweeter for them
knowing as they now know
that they can do no wrong.

How powerful a tin box with a slot has become
- perhaps if we could generate a new scientology
- a religion for the 80's
a religion based on money and call it something like 'centology'
- not scented

bears an odour

not pleasant

- would not choose to bathe in its repugnant stench

despite the range in the former scenario (current society) being larger --
- far greater diversity is observed in the latter (a future society which won't be long in coming)
... ... and as Tammy has mentioned many times previously -
diversity'd be the point here.

Regression to the mean does not mean everybody becoming the same

- quite

the

opposite.

The hunter/gatherer vs. farmer model of ADD behaviour is the one I like the best.

I was a little ****ed off about this quote from Dr. Barkley:

The last person I ever want to go hunting with is an AD/HD individual off their medication

Hmm... I guess we'll all be better off when everybody just takes their meds, huh? Well, the last person I want to trust with any life-altering decisions is a member of an establishment that has forgotten the meaning of 'independent research'.

Anyway, I was going to rant for 4 or 5 paragraphs about the nature of solutions discovered based on the method that a question is posed (i.e., "What drugs can correct the biochemical disorder know as ADHD?" is a very different question from, "What strengths and weakness should be compensated for in an ADHD individual?" or "What changes in the environment need to be made for the ADHD individual to thrive?") but I think I will just post a link to a picture, instead:

http://s356.photobucket.com/albums/oo3/prtsimmons/Junk/?action=view&current=deer1.jpg

Hmm... I got about 20 feet away from this deer... took me 25 minutes of hyper-focused, unmedicated stalking. I'm not a hunter (I consider myself a 'photo-hunter') but my family would have been eating venison if I had been. I stalk trout and geodes with the same intensity.

Anyway, if society collapses and we are suddenly trying to survive in a post-civilized wasteland, Dr. Barkley will starve because I'm not taking him hunting.

Exactly!!! That same sentence was the one that set me off. If I'm hunting, I WANT to be with ADD people. Hands down my first choice.

The hunter/gatherer vs. farmer model of ADD behaviour is the one I like the best.

I was a little ****ed off about this quote from Dr. Barkley:

The last person I ever want to go hunting with is an AD/HD individual off their medication

Hmm... I guess we'll all be better off when everybody just takes their meds, huh? Well, the last person I want to trust with any life-altering decisions is a member of an establishment that has forgotten the meaning of 'independent research'.

Anyway, I was going to rant for 4 or 5 paragraphs about the nature of solutions discovered based on the method that a question is posed (i.e., "What drugs can correct the biochemical disorder know as ADHD?" is a very different question from, "What strengths and weakness should be compensated for in an ADHD individual?" or "What changes in the environment need to be made for the ADHD individual to thrive?") but I think I will just post a link to a picture, instead:

http://s356.photobucket.com/albums/oo3/prtsimmons/Junk/?action=view&current=deer1.jpg

Hmm... I got about 20 feet away from this deer... took me 25 minutes of hyper-focused, unmedicated stalking. I'm not a hunter (I consider myself a 'photo-hunter') but my family would have been eating venison if I had been. I stalk trout and geodes with the same intensity.

Anyway, if society collapses and we are suddenly trying to survive in a post-civilized wasteland, Dr. Barkley will starve because I'm not taking him hunting.

That gave me a chuckle.

Keep in mind, ADHD-ers today live in a world that is very mentally exhausting. It may not have been that way in pre-industrial ages, where education was less valued.

Speaking strictly for myself, it's not education that I find "mentally exhausting." I love learning, even if it's not something I'm totally interested in. Rather, what exhausts me is the mind-numbing repetition and tedium of everyday life in the modern age.

It would have been virtually unheard of in hunter-gatherer times for someone to spend 8 or 9 hours a day sitting in the same position and doing the same tasks over and over again. And yet that is what most jobs in the modern world boil down to, whether you are in front of a computer or on an assembly line. And then once you are done for the day, you have to go home and do all of your "real" work - cooking, cleaning, etc.

The other problem with the modern world is the level of "noise," - the nearly infinite number of annoying details that have to be dealt with on a regular basis. Even for someone like myself, with no car, no cell phone, no credit cards, the amount of "stuff" demanding to be taken care of is overwhelming. Right now, I have to remember to buy new anti-virus software for my computer, call our vet to check on a medication dosage for one of our dogs, look up instructions to try to fix the dishwasher, call the IRS to take care of a tax lien notice on my credit report that simply should not be there, and figure out how to get the battery in my watch replaced. And that's just the things I haven't forgotten.

I'm not saying that I buy into the theory in the OP, but everything that I have read about primitive life leads me to believe it would be a far better match for my strengths and weaknesses than is the modern world.

Oh, and as for hunting...I'm at my absolute best under pressure, and going up against a bear or mammoth with only some other hunters and our spears certainly would qualify as a high-stress experience.

I think, even in the case of ADHD (which is painful, exhausting, and annoying as heck), we need to think carefully and take responsibility when we label it as a negative thing.

I have ADHD. I have always struggled in school, am currently failing, and have a very hard time connecting with people. I blame most of my past struggles on the condition. However. . .

If I did not have ADHD, I would not have the incessant, nagging restlessness that has kept me wanting and stiving for more, and trying over and over to just give up and finding myself incapable of doing so. I would likely still be living with my parents and working a dead end job. I would not have fought them as hard as I did.

When you think badly of your ADHD, maybe you're looking too hard at the technical details and not the overall context.

I can blame my past failings on ADHD. I can also blame any future successes on it.

Oh, and as for hunting...I'm at my absolute best under pressure, and going up against a bear or mammoth with only some other hunters and our spears certainly would qualify as a high-stress experience.

Yeah, the "careless mistakes" we make are made more often in low-stress environments, it seems.

Truthfully, ADHD is a negative thing overall.

The Risk Factors for untreated ADHD are devastating in both scope & nature.

Those are invariably compounded by the (US) school systems,who (collectively) don't understand the Executive Functions

As for the Hunter/Gatherer scenario, I don't have a problem with it, as I view it as strictly for entertainment.

It makes for stimulating conversation.

However, the reality is that ADHD is a debilitating disability.


tc

mctavish23

(Robert)

Truthfully, ADHD is a negative thing overall.

The Risk Factors for untreated ADHD are devastating in both scope & nature.

Those are invariably compounded by the (US) school systems,who (collectively) don't understand the Executive Functions

As for the Hunter/Gatherer scenario, I don't have a problem with it, as I view it as strictly for entertainment.

It makes for stimulating conversation.

However, the reality is that ADHD is a debilitating disability.

ADD is like every other condition the impairments are contextual in nature - the school system makes ADD even more impairing because of their lack of flexibility however as a society is is easier to see a minority as impaired children than it is to deal with the fact that the system over all is dysfunctional

I see my ADD as a double edged sword - I do the same with all my traits

They can be positive in one context while being negative in another.

The hunter/farmer thing shows ADD in the light of various contextual settings and I think that is important aspect of Hartmens work so often missed by main stream but has been soaked up a segment of the neurodiverse population . . . In the light of ADD and Hartman's book = Hunting = ADD provides positive traits but in farming ADD's traits become negative - not because the ADD has changed but because the environments are different.

ADD's impairments are greatly dependent upon the environment - perhaps your environment is not ADD friendly therefore to you it would be impairing but to tot other members it is not

My husband is a prime example that hyperactivy can be a good thing when physical effort is necessary for survival while it is a bad thing in any situation that requires one to sit down and shut-up.

To think life MUST be a mostly sit down and shut up experience therefore those of us who walk and talk are impaired greatly removes the most important item in the ADD arsenal of treatment and that is self empowerment to change an environment that doesn't work.

My husband is basically dysfunctional meaning his ADD is so bad he is unable to work for any one else For years and years he couldn't hold a job so he invented his own. He has worked in his invented job for 15 years now -

Under your paradigm Gary is dysfunctional and will always remain that way - Under the one Hartman present Gary's previous environment wasn't conducive to his ADD traits - he changed environments his traits went from a deficient to an asset

THAT is what I see in Hartmen's presentations that I find very valuable. It is also what is severely lacking in most main stream presentations

How one sees their selves in light of a condition is more important that the limitations presented by the condition itself


Knowing you are a man of science I will oblige

There are chronic conditions much more disabling that ADD and my research begins there

Attitude is rated most important in determining health-related quality of life for adolescents with spina bifida. (http://www.unitedspinal.org/publications/action/2007/02/21/attitude-solution/)

n a review of the existing scientific literature on HRQOL and chronic illness in young people, the researchers cited earlier studies that found that children and adolescents with a variety of chronic health conditions generally had lower HRQOL than their peers, but there was “substantial” individual variation. In addition, when examining the impact of their condition on HRQOL, Mmany researchers found that adolescents and young adults report that the type of condition or its severity is not the most significant factor in explaining HRQOL.

The researchers found that the variable with the strongest relationship to HRQOL was the adolescent’s attitude toward SB. “While we do not expect adolescents to have a strong positive attitude toward having SB, developing the perception that one can live a full life with relatively few restrictions in spite of the challenges of SB, does seem to be a strong protective factor for youth in this sample. Perceiving SB as having a major negative impact on one’s life is related to more negative HRQOL outcomes.”

“[T]he data in this study support our previous findings of differential patterns of factors associated with HRQOL and functional status outcomes. While SB neurological severity contributes substantially to functional status, its contribution to HRQOL appears to be much smaller.”

{End Quote}


Researchers are asking people throughout Britain how happy they are with their lot in life (http://www.news-medical.net/?id=6292)

Surgeons tell us that they can do exactly the same procedure on two similar people, but whilst one is back at work within a week, the other can become depressed and disabled by their situation. It is the patient's perception of how the operation affects them that is the greatest influence on the difference," said Professor Suzanne Skevington, who heads the WHO Field Centre for the Study of Quality of Life at the University of Bath.

"In a nutshell, quality of life is about people's perception of their position in life in the context of the culture and value systems in which they live and in relation to their goals, expectations, standards and concerns".

{End Quote}

Coping and Psychosocial Adjustment of Women With Diabetes (http://tde.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/26/1/105)

RESULTS

The most frequently and effectively used coping styles were optimistic, confrontive, self-reliant, and supportant. The psychological, social, and health care domains showed the most problems; the fewest were in the extended family, sexual, and vocational domains. Relationships were found between women's coping styles and psychosocial adjustment, with better adjustment associated with effective use of confrontive, supportant, optimistic, self-reliant, and palliative coping styles.
{End Quote}



I understand there is a sub-set of members that view their ADD as a separate entity some how or another - You have ADD

However there is another group which includes myself where our ADD is part of us.We don't have ADD we are ADD

Saying ADD is mostly negative - according to your intentions you are saying the condition is mostly negative but to those of us who are unable to view our ADD separate from ourselves we are reading the words to mean being who and what we are is mostly negative.

As the empirical research above indicates many of us may be more satisfied because we do look at our positive traits.Our satisfaction with life in general isn't despite our more ADD positive out look but because of it no matter what are degree of "impairment" I do not see myself as living a lie I simply refuse to see my life according to "dysfunctional'

When I first joined here I saw my ADD as a disorder mostly negative . . . I did so due to what I saw a lack if ability to function. I had a poor out come. Due to some passionate discussions here I switched my perspective of ADD to a modified neurodiverse view. That was two almost three years ago I have to say life experiences have improved a great deal with my standard of living following suit.

My Quality of life is directly linked to the fact I am no longer seeing my selves as impaired but as functioning differently - According to the scientific evidence - perception may not be every thing but it is a major determining factor as to ones ability to enjoy living.

You got that right meadd823.
I am ADD. It is an essential part of my persona. So if I am to feel good about myself, I must learn to feel good about my ADD. And try not to see it as merely a disorder.

I think the influence of the environment on our functioning is at least as important as our genetic background. There is nature, nurture and environment.

I have worked both in very liberal and very strict working environments myself. I can tell you that freedom is critical for me. Flexibility and variation are also important factors. So is being appreciated and listened to.
If the factors are right I can surpass myself. If they're not I suck big time and begin to show depressive tendencies. These things can change by the day.

Mentally or rather conceptually(though not physically, that's another matter) I could easily imagine myself as a 'hunter'
But in such a situation, the background has to be right, the mindset correct and the appropriate skills learned. You can't just jump in and go.
So it is hard to determine exactly how much truth there is to this hunter/farmer idea. The average westerner simply has no appropriate reference frame to test that.

qhcowgirl and prtsimmons LAMO where were you three years ago??? = I didn't like that comment either {still don't} Shortly after a discussion very similar to this one I grew a distinct dislike for Barkley - which I basically haven't changed except to be more indifferent toward these insensitive comments . . . If you read his stuff long enough he will go into how we ADDers are socially inept {LAMO - like he isn't :p}

For entertainment purposes here (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=240748&postcount=13) was my response to the same Barkley quote {posted by the same member (http://www.addforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=239880&postcount=1) no less = :p}

Some simply don't change while others improve their VB coding abilities and become more secure in their perspective. :rolleyes:


That is a silly little idea for building self-esteem in AD/HD children, and I don’t happen to believe that you should be building self-esteem by lying to people, by practicing small deceits, by creating little stories about the origin of a disorder so that you can act as if it wasn’t a disorder

The truth of it is how could any one be lying When no one knows the truth??

There are different theories but no one knows for sure why the ADD genetics has survived. Evolution itself is still a theory.

Deceit is pretending you know the origins of ADD when you don’t


THAT is the “real” truth - if we are going to be speaking in un -bias truth




From that view, there’s nothing wrong with AD/HD. It’s the environment that’s the problem. AD/HD is just a mismatch between little hunters where hunting is no longer needed by the environment.

However, the reality is that ADHD is a debilitating disability.

Let me see . . . .

Using Barkely's logic that ADD is a disability a handicap it couldn't possible be the environment that causes a decrease in our ability to function - External environment changes couldn't possible help disability people function better that is why public places have all those ramps for people in wheel chairs.:cool:

{What ever}


When you think badly of your ADHD, maybe you're looking too hard at the technical details and not the overall context.

I can blame my past failings on ADHD. I can also blame any future successes on it.

I found blaming my ADD and hating it for all it's problem didn't get me any where at all - I felt like crap I never felt deserving or worthy because I was "disordered'

I came here feeling inferior and looking to become some thing better instead of some thing genetics stuck me as being. I met some folks in here like Stabile and Nova that had views of their ADD I never imagined. They didn't feel inferior at all some even felt blessed or gifted not despite ADD like I had seen before but because of it.

I never completely changed my perspectives to match theirs. Via a few passionate exchanges with these folks I learned a great deal about their alternate points of view as well as the reasons for this unique perspective . . .The exposer to some thing besides main stream ADD negative "ADD= dysfunctional" perspective had enough of an impact upon me to modify my perspective of ADD a great deal . Funny thing is when my view of ADD improved my self perception did as well.

I found what I came for - I found me not just who I wanted to be. I found out I had a choice, I didn't have to be a victim of flawed genetics. I decided I was exactly who and what I was designed to be and it was my responsibility to find a way to make my traits work for me instead of against me . . .. I don't have to come here and be who I want any more because what I am in here I am out in the real world That opened up some pretty awesome experiences - the only thing I changed in the beginning was my perspective of ADD {and it wasn't an easy task either} - every thing else was due to that fact.

Some times my ADD is a good thing some times it isn't and I have learned what environments work best for me and ways to cope with being in those environments where my traits are more restrained and impairing.

I think every trait can be positive or negative because most traits are basically neutral{they simple are} - it is what one decides to do about the various traits that create the " charge"



So it is hard to determine exactly how much truth there is to this hunter/farmer idea. The average westerner simply has no appropriate reference frame to test that.

Actually matsuiny2004 posted a hyperlink to a most excellent article for Northwestern University - I want to repeat some of the information in it as it pertains to this discussion big time.



Is ADHD an Advantage For Nomadic Tribesmen In Kenya? (http://www.northwestern.edu/newscenter/stories/2008/06/ariaaltribe.html)

The research, published today (June 10) in the open access journal BMC Evolutionary Biology, shows that an ADHD-associated version of the gene DRD4 is associated with better health in nomadic tribesmen, yet may cause malnourishment in their settled cousins.

“Our findings suggest that some of the variety of personalities we see in people is evolutionarily helpful or detrimental, depending on the context,” said Dan Eisenberg, a first-year anthropology graduate student in Northwestern’s Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences and lead author of the study. “This insight might allow us to begin to view ADHD as not just a disease but something with adaptive components.”


{further down same article }

The researchers found a striking difference in the two populations. Those with the DRD4/7R allele were better nourished in the nomadic population but less well-nourished in the settled population.

The effects of different versions of dopamine genes have been studied in industrialized countries, but very little research has been carried out in non-industrial, subsistence environments like the areas where the Ariaal live. This is despite the fact that such environments may be more similar to the environments where much of human genetic evolution took place.
{End Quote}

It looks like science may finally be catching up - some of us have been saying ADD is a contextual disorder for YEARS!


ADDers way of saying ya don't want to hunt with me just because I have ADD you can eat my shorts - because I won't be sharing dinner! :D

hunter farmer/gatherer

outside

hunter catches stuff
farmer/gatherer grows stuff

inside

hunter makes new connections (associative thought patterns)
famer/gatherer develops these insights into { community-wide patterns, social structure, group behaviour }

no point in having great insight into the workings of man -
- if that insight cannot be shared and developed into something better for man (as a whole)

The ADDer's propensity towards creativity and novel better perspectives on old mundane reality are what Hartmann means -
we have a forum member (Carla B.) who is friends with Hartmann and who has confirmed (on site) that Hartmann was playing a metaphor --
(forum thread :: metamind (science subforum))

- he's not trying to suggest that when it all falls that we'll be the ones who survive as most likely to fell a cow without alerting it to 3 mph stampede;

that'd be silly.

Personally, I figure eating food is dumb -
bread and water all round -
butter and slice of lemon withstanding.

Those with the DRD4/7R allele were better nourished in the nomadic population but less well-nourished in the settled population.

strap a mobile device down and
boredom,
depression -
he'll be off his food before you know -

- which is all to say

Do I look like a tree?Tammy original circa 2004
paraphrase

I definately agree with the theory.

Sometimes I think I'd be better off running through the woods throwing spears at an Ox! I'd then ROAR triumphantly as I tear its flesh away with my teeth!!

I'm serious by the way. I need to unleash the beast within!!

below
---(1)---

Attitude (http://www.unitedspinal.org/publications/action/2007/02/21/attitude-solution/)

---(2)---

Researchers (http://www.news-medical.net/?id=6292) are asking people throughout Britain how happy they are with their lot in life
Surgeons tell us that they can do exactly the same procedure on two similar people, but whilst one is back at work within a week, the other can become depressed and disabled by their situation. It is the patient's perception of how the operation affects them that is the greatest influence on the difference," said ...

---(3)---

"In a nutshell, quality of life is about people's perception of their position in life
in the context
of the culture and value systems in which they live
and
in relation
to their goals, expectations, standards and concerns".

---(4)---

Coping (http://tde.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/26/1/105) and Psychosocial Adjustment of Women With Diabetes
RESULTS
The most frequently and effectively used coping styles were optimistic, confrontive, self-reliant, and supportant. The psychological, social, and health care domains showed the most problems; the fewest were in the extended family, sexual, and vocational domains. Relationships were found between women's coping styles and psychosocial adjustment, with better adjustment associated with effective use of confrontive, supportant, optimistic, self-reliant, and palliative coping styles.

---(5)---

I understand there is a sub-set of members that view their ADD as a separate entity some how or another - You have ADD
However there is another group which includes myself where our ADD is part of us.We don't have ADD we are ADD
Saying ADD is mostly negative - according to your intentions you are saying the condition is mostly negative but to those of us who are unable to view our ADD separate from ourselves we are reading the words to mean being who and what we are is mostly negative.
As the empirical research above indicates many of us may be more satisfied because we do look at our positive traits.Our satisfaction with life in general isn't despite our more ADD positive out look but because of it no matter what are degree of "impairment" I do not see myself as living a lie I simply refuse to see my life according to "dysfunctional'
When I first joined here I saw my ADD as a disorder mostly negative . . . I did so due to what I saw a lack if ability to function. I had a poor out come. Due to some passionate discussions here I switched my perspective of ADD to a modified neurodiverse view. That was two almost three years ago I have to say life experiences have improved a great deal with my standard of living following suit.
My Quality of life is directly linked to the fact I am no longer seeing my selves as impaired but as functioning differently - According to the scientific evidence - perception may not be every thing but it is a major determining factor as to ones ability to enjoy living.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

from the reference in ---(2 (http://www.news-medical.net/?id=6292))---
... ...extensive living space is important in the US but is less important in Japan ... ...
- one might consider it lucky that people living in a country with 'extensive living space' consider it a good thing - and lucky that those who do not
do not
- however, without particularly much thought required - it's clear that people's minds are being shaped to environment -
? what sense ? being miserable in Japan when there is little hope of the population of Japan re-settling in the wilder and unpopulated sections of the United States.

Smacks of mind sampling its immediate environment and defining a realistic goal for the mind's own happiness -
which is as it should be -

- happiness as an attainable goal.

from ---(1)---
previous discussions of attitude have revealed that a positive attitude may be considered by those who dissent most argumentatively
as form of denial.

Here's a counter to that argument.

The we in 'we' is an u''ber-construct formed from neurone -
- and the neurone and structures which the neurone forms
- define optimal firing kinetics

the nerve 'wants' to fire -
superstructures formed from nerve 'want' to fire

- though 'how' they need to fire is defined by structure -
which defines lower and upper threshold (enough to drive a signal - not so much as to de-sensitize the system)

In alignment with expression of neural plasticity from ---(2 (http://www.news-medical.net/?id=6292))--- above
- the need to fire is primary to the secondary concern of how firing is elicited -
- and we can choose either 'negative' or 'positive' approach towards achieving the end effect of satisfying the nerve cells which in turn our selves
defining
characteristically.

My point here is that whether 'positive' or 'negative' outlook are employed -
either perspective secondary to the real needs of mind of man -

- the needs of mind of man and of neurone

->- to fire -<-

and neither of the two approaches informed unless realization is gained of this argument -
- this argument representing an attempt to expose the illusion of mind
- the illusion of why we're driven to discuss ~anything~ particularly

From the perspective of mind
- one can either tend towards happy feelings (happy neural transmission) with the positive outlook -
or negative feelings (angry neural transmission) with the negative outlook which paints those with a positive outlook as delusional -
and those with a negative outlook as 'better' because only they can handle the truth.

Trick of the mind is all it is.

In ---(5)--- Tammy makes a key observation that McTavish23's statement is offensive to ADDers of a certain pre-disposition (the AMs versus the HAVEs)
(of course - absolutely unintentionally by McTavish23)
- who'd probably feel hard done by and react accordingly -
- and if the reaction is similar to
'I'm sorry if you can't handle the truth'
- then he could either be correct or alternatively using the
... ... negative outlook as 'better' because only they can handle the truth ...
from above.

I think it's more likely, given the high level of debate on-site, that if we observe a forum divided on this basic issue -
that the issue will need to be resolved by delving far deeper than working out who is right and who is wrong -
- and after proper consideration I'm convinced that we'll find that we're
(and as described above) -

- simply falling victims to our own hidden
- the illusion of why we're driven to discuss ~anything~ particularly

infrastructure.

---(1)---, ---(2)--- and ---(5)---
---then---
resolved by peeking under our own hood (into our own minds).

In ---(3)--- Tammy introduces the idea of relation and context.
A context is an environment for a mind and may be seen as similar in principle to the 'wide open spaces' argument in Japan and the US

- importantly though switching from
external space happiness
to
internal space happiness -

- which is a little confusing because our happiness in both of these two cases is
internal
(within our own minds)

Smacks of mind sampling its immediate environment and defining a realistic goal for the mind's own happiness -
which is as it should be -

... expression of neural plasticity
In this latter scenario - people will be measuring themselves relative to other people and defining their own happiness based on how closely their lives (physical, mental and spiritual aspects) measure up to people in their {immediate, virtual, extended} community

- unrealistic expectations, unfair divisions of wealth -
inequality which prevents people from realising their own destiny -
most classically described as freedom -

- though the freedom here is slightly more complex than the issue of 'gaol or not' -

- my point being that as we look around and see a World partitioned into a small percentage of 'haves' and large percentage of 'have nots'

- that one begins to feel oneself {restricted, incarcerated, imprisoned} by the social structures which we need live by -
lest we desire
ourselves to find
in prison

(proper)

from ---(4)---
self-reliant

~aka~ free

~aka~ not{restricted, incarcerated, imprisoned}

from directly above

'self-reliant' is the tendency.

self-reliant is the tendency

- an awakening (ADD) to the awareness that the things we hate to do for no particular gain
much pain
we inflict upon ourselves

pain from
&
pain for

shame

opening up a window to
understanding of

attitude, perspective

forum thread :: We create our own reality (Nova)
applies.

First of all, thanks for those excellent responses.

I don't disagree with them per se',although I do continue to view the theory in question as an esoteric excercise.

Either way, the nice thing is there's no "wrong answer" to any of this.

I also believe that one of the things that is often overlooked, especially within the ADHD community, is our resilience.

We literally, have to work harder to accomplish everyday routine tasks, that are not impairments for our non-ADHD peers.

Basically, everyday is a good day;part of which includes the experiences and feedback from the Forum.


tc

mctavish23

(Robert)

I really like the hunter/farmer theory and here's why.

My brain is not necessarily better or worse than anyone elses. It's just different. It needs a lot of fuel and it takes a lot of work to keep it functioning. It's either going 100% and laser sharp or it's drifting, foggy, and disoriented.

But here's the thing. If I'm working on something that captures my imagination in an area I'm competent in (and people acknowledge that), I'm like a bloodhound on the scent. I'll forget to eat, drink, and sleep and I'll be 100% the entire time. On the other hand, if it's something that is boring, I'm bad at (and people tell me so) then I'll never get close to even 10%. My brain is completely gone.

It's interesting because many of the farmers/ranchers/cowboys I know are either diagnosed or undiagnosed ADHD. Others, that may or may not be ADHD still have a whole lot of the traits. And yes, most do quite a bit of hunting (whaddya know? unmedicated!). I have a gut feeling that Barkley has never been hunting -- especially with guys like these... I can say for sure, if I'm ever in a sticky situation (or hunting) I want these guys around. They're likely to do just what's needed and they're not going to miss.

Thank you for the well thought out and succinct response. I have only one observation. People talk about "hyperfocus" being an adhd trait. I have never seen scientific literature which indicates that this trait is advantageous to us. What I have seen is video game studies and apparently ADHD kids can't focus as well as regular kids. What if this is another myth built up by the self help industry? Do we not have business people, artisans, athletes, scientists...etc who can all hyperfocus, do so on a regular basis, and are not ADHD?

...some of us have been saying ADD is a contextual disorder for YEARS...

The difficulty in offering this argument is that there's an automatic reaction against the suggestion
- the desire that ADD be considered an intrinsic rather than extrinsic disorder.

Pretty much all of the observations which we use to convince ourselves that ADHD is an intrinsic disorder hold -
- regardless of whether we shift the nature of our understanding of its aetiology from intrinsically to extrinsically defined -

In both cases we see unhappy disordered ADDers
- who cannot pay attention,
- in which motivation and impulsivity is a problem,
- who cannot make their minds perform the tasks which society demands because the conscious mind cannot overrule the subconscious desire to 'get the hell outta' there'
- who can only comply with assistance from stimulant therapeutic or concerted effort to make the task more appealing.

So
- is ADD a disorder?
Noting that we're not discussing whether we feel disordered in this section -
that point is off the table -
of course the condition feels bad - it's why we're here -

- we're now shifting our focus onto whether one can feel disordered through a condition which is not a disorder.

Two models

model 'better'
- if the problems which we're having are serving to have the net effect of forcing change upon our society -
then our disorder is an unfortunate side-effect of change for the better.

model 'problem'
- if however we consider ourselves incapable of taking part in activities which are not below us but above us -
then our disorder results from a disease or problem.

Why does any of this matter ?

If one would like to make an ADDer happy (the point of this forum)
- then one needs to know whether one need

change nonADDer to ADDer (model 'better')
or
change ADDer to nonADDer (model 'problem')

-*-

So - which is it to be?

There will be a right and a wrong answer here -
and I'm 100% certain that I know which of these models is correct -

why?

because only one model makes sense with all available information taken into account -
- empirical science has a basic problem in that it accepts only (generally) statistically validated conclusions which have been published in peer reviewed journal
medical literature has a bias towards classification and chemical intervention in intrinsic disease models -
- in the case of model 'better' forADD - empirical science isn't going to work particularly well (due to the issue of confounding variables and incapacity to define appropriate controls)
-> aetiology and social change in extrinsic disorder models.

- aetiology (not classification)and social change (not chemical intervention) in extrinsic disorder models (not intrinsic disease models).

why?

1. As above - the presence of multiple confounding parameters and incapacity to define appropriate controls. As the number of parameters which one need consider to define a model increases - so does our requirement for more measurements on a larger study population.
Empirical science works best when we look for a difference between case and tightly matched control population -
- and as the size of effect of intervention increases -
- the efforts of epidemiological statistician to apply 'fix' factors (regression-based methods) to ameliorate the effects of confounding variables and small end-effect or outcome -
should be seen as pseudo-science for the most part.

This idea was first described to me around 20 years ago when the leading genetic epidemiologist of our time described some of the then novel swathe of techniques as illegal methodology to force apart inextricably linked variables.

2. There is no money to be made in suggesting social change - pharmaceutical drug vendors (in sharp contrast) make much money from selling 'happy pills' -
I read online that the pharmaceutical lobby group in the US is considered particularly powerful for all the wrong reasons.

3. The extrinsic disorder argument is much more abstract (more difficult to understand) than the intrinsic disease model -
it requires the individual to realise that his own mind is a level apart from his brain/body -
mind:body duality is not a complex idea -
though sufficiently difficult to watch faces glaze over when the complexity of introduction of idea of abstraction layers are introduced into describing the nature of man (mind and body) to man (to the conscious mind).

4. Accepting that social change need be mandated will serve to point the finger of blame at many of the Institutions with great power in our current society and will point towards the necessity in their loss of control over mindspace of man.
Political, economic, legal (PEL on Earth) - concerns will need to be redefined
- alongside the Institutions which suffer through collateral damage (religious, educational, scientific, national organizations).

People don't much like losing the illusion of control upon which their lives are precariously balanced.

-*-

The advantage of the human mind is that it can assimilate the conclusions of classical empirical case:control research study
and then add additional observations which empirical science has not yet made
(nor can make)
into case-control

- and offer up a model which encapsulates both.

And that's what I believe we've done
- the purest goal of science is the simplest model which may explain away all observable phenomena -
empirical science delivers one small subset of all observable phenomena
and the global model which I'm attempting to describe will (of necessity) need to include the conclusions which classical empirical science has replicated to unambiguous statistical (p<0.001) significance.

Thank you for the well thought out and succinct response. I have only one observation. People talk about "hyperfocus" being an adhd trait. I have never seen scientific literature which indicates that this trait is advantageous to us. What I have seen is video game studies and apparently ADHD kids can't focus as well as regular kids. What if this is another myth built up by the self help industry? Do we not have business people, artisans, athletes, scientists...etc who can all hyperfocus, do so on a regular basis, and are not ADHD?

Sure we do. There are countless books on this and on how to achieve this mental state. It's called being in "the zone" or in the state when your brainwaves are right between Alpha and Theta. There are all kinds of terms for it. But, what it is is hyperfocus.

Since many people, athletes, businessmen... all the groups you named want to be able to consciously achieve this mental state, it's proven to be something advantageous in the right situation.

It's a fact that ADDers are in this state more often than most people. Like any tool or function, it only helps in the right context.

Walt Disney was concentrating so hard on his work, he didn't notice the house was burning. In that case, the concentration that allowed him to produce brilliant work, could have gotten him killed.

When you want to play baseball, you don't put on mittens. When you want to keep your hands warm, you don't put on a baseball glove. :)

Sure we do. There are countless books on this and on how to achieve this mental state. It's called being in "the zone" or in the state when your brainwaves are right between Alpha and Theta. There are all kinds of terms for it. But, what it is is hyperfocus.

EXACTLY.

example of hitting the zone (the alpha/theta or theta/alpha EEG transition)



at the interface between the sleep/wake cycle
(described most recently with ADDF::Luthien on site)



during efficient aerobic exercise (walking for instance)
(described most recently with ADDF::Ian here)
when lost in the depths of computer programming, thought or daydreaming
(commonly discussed here)

- and empirical science will be able
(should it look)
- to observe the association between specific pattern of brain wave and aerobic respiratory profile -
- using only a buncha'lectrodes, large box and some calori-/spectro- metric device with red LEDs.

-*-

The question then becomes
'why does the zone feel so great ?'

The solution to this question will reveal the basis of that pull (evolutionary) on man (to mind) -
- which concerns us here

The solution to this question will reveal the basis of that pull
- of course towards that zone -

during efficient aerobic exercise (walking for instance)-<- ADD with an H for hyperactivity

when lost in the depths of computer programming, thought or daydreaming-<- ADD with an I for Inattentivity

Hyperfocus is that place.

We're good, better than most at hitting that very pleasant place -
a place which we're meant to be reaching towards

- sadly though and of necessity -
approaching that better place results in an incapacity to perform the tasks which were our 'be all and end all' in a lesser place (nonADD).

The idea of

Boards of Canada
'(lovely) place in the country'
- an internal (lovely) place in the country
(from previously on site here)
->-
is an attempt to contrast the idea of an 'internal - external' and an 'internal - internal' characterization of 'paradise'.

Paradise might be considered the image of Hawaii which we see in the first episode of Lost (minus the aeroplane wreckage) -
---or---
may better (as I'm trying to describe here) -
be seen as an internal-internal state of mind -
->-
an actual real change in the mind which is accompanied by an observable change in human physiology -
- and where the underlying change in mind can be inferred unambiguously based around the secondary effects (to it)
which we can observe.

- an internal (lovely) place in the country - incidentally this is the basis to 'the promised land'
- an internal-internal promised land
whose nature
has so concerned the three major lines of Abrahamic religion -

- an internal (lovely) place in the country Our incapacity to do the pointless things (or so ADDer may now characterize) which previously had been our be all and end all (nonADDer) -
feels like a disorder

- absolutely

- an internal (lovely) place in the country though the disordered feeling is not arising through actual disorder -
- more through change -
where it is not pleasant to change in an environment which imposes unsupportable restrictions on novel form -

change without environment
changing concomitantly -
->-
- our problem -

imprisoned within structures
long past
'sell-by'
date.
->-
- our problem -

'beautiful place in the country'

I don't think Hartmann was proposing a scientific theory, rather a pragmatic framework to live by. His key point was "work to your strengths and know your weaknesses" I find the negativity about this to be a bit "farmerish".
I have taken much of his comment and very constructively moulded my work life to suit me. After using his comments and suggestions I boosted my earnings by several multiples in 3 years.
This condition has to be corralled. You have to live positively. You have to get up every day and decide to make a difference.
If you are troubled - Don't drink, think.
If you are in marital trouble - talk to your spouse, not look for another.
If someone if ****ing you off - try walk a few steps in their shoes.
If you get road rage - switch off - trust me on this one.
If you are procrastinating - decide.
If you have surplus energy that's driving you crazy find something to burn it out on.
Very importantly, don't get caught in other peoples fights. What they don't fight for they won't value. Why deny them? And if they should have negotiated why help them? It will do no good.

Would I take an ADD person hunting with me? Just walk around in wide open lion country and I know I would. That hypersensitivity would be a huge attribute. When I go walking in big game country, I usually spot more than than my norm colleagues. So Dr Barkley, with that comment I can say you are barking up the wrong tree.

thanks to cowgirl and addme823 for some astute observations.

Hunting -> Farming -> Hunting -> Farming

- we need find something new before we develop it into a workable system

transferring our understanding of 'hunting' away from stalking animals and into locating something new which assists our survival
and moving 'farming' away from context of fruit and vegetables and into the idea of sustainable growth and delivery of a novel ('hunted') product to an entire community

- we can push (hunter -> gatherer)n into a generic metaphor for the pattern of evolution

Hunting -> Farming -> Hunting -> FarmingHunt X
Farm X
Hunt something better for the population than X -> Y for instance
Farm Y

The silicon chip was hunted
and
As we observe ever increasing take up of the Internet by households world-wide - so can we consider ourselves to be working towards farming the technology out to our species as a whole -

the idea of sustainable growth and delivery of a novel ('hunted') product to an entire community
to make life significantly better for those 'with'

(all of us
(sometime soon))

relative to

those 'before' / 'without'.

I think the point of the theory is less about being a 'hunter' in a 'school' or 'farming' situation, and more about the fact that this gene, the 7R allele, contributes to ADD. This would put a cause to ADD, and that cause is a genetic mutation that only exists because, in the history of evolution, it was once helpful. The sceintific proof of the gene, and the effect of it, is there. It's just where you apply that information: in your personal daily life or in the scope of human existance and neurobiology.

Does Hartmann propose this theory for all subtypes? I was diagnosed PI, but I'm all eyes and ears until I take Adderall. Then I get dreamy and introverted. You would not want to take me hunting then. I can't even cross the bloody street.

It's an interesting theory, but one I haven't looked at in depth too much because I tend to get thrown off by inconsistencies and here's what threw me off:

My boyfriend has undiagnosed ADD traits and he is a farmer. In fact I can see a lot of ways in which farming and ADD seem quite compatible. And I know that there are a lot of farmers out there who have fine minds and are out-of-the-box thinkers. Many of them have written books.

In his case, working on the farm keeps him in constant motion. There is always something to do for somebody who can't sit still for long. If the daily chores are complete, there is always some project that has been put on the back burner that can be taken up, especially if you are the main worker on a small family farm. Fences to mend, old tractors and trucks and bikes that can be repaired. Scrap metal to haul away. Old tree branches that can be cut up for firewood. He never finds himself in the situation of having nothing to occupy his hands.

New challenges arise everyday. Something breaking down, an animal with a health emergency. It's frustrating, but it also keeps you from being bored.

When doing field work and sitting long hours on a tractor, one has all the time to think and daydream he could want.

And he's his own boss.

That's what kept me from studying the hunter/farmer theory in depth. LOL.

It's an interesting theory, but one I haven't looked at in depth too much because I tend to get thrown off by inconsistencies and here's what threw me off:

My boyfriend has undiagnosed ADD traits and he is a farmer. In fact I can see a lot of ways in which farming and ADD seem quite compatible. And I know that there are a lot of farmers out there who have fine minds and are out-of-the-box thinkers. Many of them have written books.

In his case, working on the farm keeps him in constant motion. There is always something to do for somebody who can't sit still for long. If the daily chores are complete, there is always some project that has been put on the back burner that can be taken up, especially if you are the main worker on a small family farm. Fences to mend, old tractors and trucks and bikes that can be repaired. Scrap metal to haul away. Old tree branches that can be cut up for firewood. He never finds himself in the situation of having nothing to occupy his hands.

New challenges arise everyday. Something breaking down, an animal with a health emergency. It's frustrating, but it also keeps you from being bored.

When doing field work and sitting long hours on a tractor, one has all the time to think and daydream he could want.

And he's his own boss.

That's what kept me from studying the hunter/farmer theory in depth. LOL.

I've read Hartmann's book and that's what threw me off too at first. But then he went on to say that modern farmers, ranchers, and cowboys all fall into the "hunter" gene.

His hunter/farmer theory is talking about when civilization first started and there were nomads (hunters/gatherers) and people started banding together forming villages/towns/cities in places like the fertile crescent. They were farmers...

So yeah, the hunter/farmer theory is misleading as todays farmers are exactly what Hartmann is talking about when he describes hunters.

If he were using modern examples I'd imagine it would be the farmer/secretary theory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-gatherer

is real useful
- I had thought that gatherer was farmer also.

a hunter seeks out novel approach,
a gatherer appears to be a scavenger (a good thing - unlike the images which are conjured up),
and a farmer appears to be a distribution network ->- 'farming it out'
(here)

The repeating pattern (I guess) is

(hunter/gatherer
farmer)n

... ... etc ... ...

next up for our species is the
farmer -> hunter/gatherer
transition

what does this mean in our context?

- Physical level -
a shift away from sedentary living (no longer tied to physical possessions)
-> classical nomadic existence

- Mental level -
a shift away from a job for life in one discipline
-> nomadic existence within mindspace

- generally though,
change -
which is mandated through

dwindling physical resources
inexpensive phosphorus we use today will likely cease to exist within 50 years (http://www.eafl.org.uk/Phosphate.asp)

and

dwindling mental resources
vedanta - the end of knowledge

and

desire for stimulation when other schemes just don't cut it.

We're essentially in a 'game' -
evolve - optimise structure
evolve again ... ... ...
... ... ~etc~ ... ...

where

evolve -> is a -> hunter/gatherer task
optimise structure -> is a -> farmer task
evolve again -> is a -> hunter/gatherer task
optimise (novel) structure -> is a -> farmer task
... ... ~etc~ ... ...

dwindling physical and mental resources
- our two evolutionary abstraction layers of note
are going to have to move on

farmer
->-
hunter/gathererwhere?

physical ->- mental ->- spiritual abstraction layers define man

physical cf dopamine and its involvement in motion -
->- Parkinson's disease

mental cf the effects the dopaminergic meds we take have on helping us to think

spiritual cf dopaminergic activation and its alliance with 'love'

I've read Hartmann's book and that's what threw me off too at first. But then he went on to say that modern farmers, ranchers, and cowboys all fall into the "hunter" gene.

His hunter/farmer theory is talking about when civilization first started and there were nomads (hunters/gatherers) and people started banding together forming villages/towns/cities in places like the fertile crescent. They were farmers...

So yeah, the hunter/farmer theory is misleading as todays farmers are exactly what Hartmann is talking about when he describes hunters.

If he were using modern examples I'd imagine it would be the farmer/secretary theory.

Oh, OK, lol. That makes sense. I don't mean I rejected the theory out of hand, I was just thrown off by that. Kind of like when I am trying to organize papers and stuff and I come across something that doesn't seem to fit into any of my categories and it stumps me and I usually end up leaving the whole project unfinished.

Oh, OK, lol. That makes sense. I don't mean I rejected the theory out of hand, I was just thrown off by that. Kind of like when I am trying to organize papers and stuff and I come across something that doesn't seem to fit into any of my categories and it stumps me and I usually end up leaving the whole project unfinished.

Oh yeah, I know what you mean... Threw me off at first too but I kept reading and I was glad he acknowledged modern farmers/ranchers. If he hadn't I'd have been convinced he knew nothing... :D