> Jim refers - purely in passing - to an alleged contrast between a Biblical
> notion of dominion and an amerind philosophy of co-existence as a part
> of nature.
>
> I think that it can be (and has been) shown that the Biblical picture is
> not what Lynn White suggested. I would be very interested in evidence that
> there ever was an Amerind Philosophy on the subject - as distinct from
> a few remarks attributed to an enormous range of peoples across an entire
> continent, but without any sign that they had actually subjected their
> own myths and customs to theoretical analysis (done any philosophy).
Huh?
The "Amerind Philosophy" to which you refer was not derived through
"theoretical analysis", that is correct. Does this somehow invalidate
it or make it any less useful as an archetype?
= Lee =