The various types and modes of production activities and their respective theories are part of various socio-cultures, where they are spread and accepted according to various kinds of logic. Some of their anthropological roots should be taken into consideration. The terminologies of kinship and affinity show the existence of two main human tendencies, distinguishing people or identifying them to each other. Significant confirmations of such tendencies can be found in currently used kinds of logic, in both the general criteria of validity and small everyday choices, in both coordination and possession, in both the processes of adaptation to conventions and the search for freedom, in the possible extended psychodynamic implications. The present article is mainly based on the balanced and complementary use of different kinds of logic, theoretical and empirical-dialectic, leading to results which do not necessarily coincide with each other, and which also involve the natural inner sense and relationships in pairs. As such they would soon be able to provide total pictures of the living being, both global and local, both theocratic-republican and monarchic-individualist. In such a way it is possible to access both humanistic and scientific ambits, both Eastern and Western life styles, and therefore gradually reach a deeper explanation and understanding of the various socio-cultural types and modes, both primitive and civilized. In such a comprehensive perspective the important passages during their evolution from the initial hunters-gatherers socio-culture assumed as reference appear to have been: the intervention on the environment through horticulture and herding activities, and subsequently the intervention on the production units themselves, through a partial exchange of production activities between males and females, with males who from hunters and herders became farmers, and females who from gatherers and horticulturalists became spinners and weavers. In at least some cases this passage occurred guiltily and shamefully, as part of sexual and marriage activities. While attempting to provide a better explanation and understanding of the different types and modes of life and production, the main purpose and aim of the present article is to provide a first trace for the harmonization of knowledge and active capabilities which would help to constitute - firstly virtually, then effectively -a living socio-cultural laboratory, one that designs and experiences types of life, of research and of sustainable production activities by taking actively part in them. At an easier and more feasible level, although more limited in range, single individuals and family units can be involved, even if partially, and actual social and community structures and operations can be adapted, beginning with research bodies which may be limited by the use of incomplete kinds of logic and methodologies. The purpose and aim of such laboratories would be the comprehensive consideration of the important passages during the so-called evolution of human socio-cultures, as this may be a source of new or rediscovered knowledge and its respective applications, in particular through a reappraisal and possible remedy for the socio-cultural mistakes and errors concerning the fundamental evolutionary passages of humankind.
展开▼
