How are we to say what the differences of prehistoric life was to the modern day !Kung tribes? Human error would play a huge role in our "assumptions- of the !Kung. For example, we might turn around to be just as wrong as the article of the Nacirema. Obviously, there is already a misconception about the bushman. For example, in McNeil's essay, he comments on how a woman was speaking to a bushman and demanded to see one. When he explained to her that he was indeed a bushman she said, "no, a wild bushman, with a tail."" Lee states that the bushman represent "the basic human adaptation stripped of the accretions and complications brought about by agriculture, urbanization, advanced technology, and national and class conflict "all of the advances' of the last few thousand years."" Lee is being very ethnocentric in this statement. He is basing our technology on the !Kung lifestyle. Webster Dictionary states technology as "a manner of accomplishing a task especially using technical processes, methods, or knowledge."" According to this definition, the !Kung have a very advanced technology. They have proven that they can accomplish tasks using very precise processes, methods, and vast knowledge. It is not our' technology, but they have proved that they do not need ours to survive. It is their own form of living, which makes them a unique, separate culture. This in no way makes them animal like, wild, or undomesticated. In fact, the bushman have developed techniques that are obviously creditable due to the fact that they survived this way for so long. In addition, they have the same kinship-if not stronger-than our own. They can handle disputes without a leader and are very fond of working together as a team. In this aspect, they don't need our methods of living. Our methods though, is exactly what the !Kung are getting involved in. According to Howell, most bushman are settled on "settlement stations- with European farmers and cattlemen.
