Why the world is a better place than before

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
And why did they think agriculture was going to make their lives a little better? There must have been a reason, right?

I'm sure it made some people's lives better, but it transformed society so that most people ended up having a worse life. It also in my opinion made the world a worse place to live.

The point is that no one came up with an evil plan to ruin the world for their own gain, but as heirarchies developed things started to progress to a more exploitive society.

They were not as ill-fed. Peasants were worse fed. Read the excerp. Hunter-gatherer societies didn't have a social hierarchy because there was no property ownership.

Please read "Guns, Germs, and Steel" by Jared Diamond, please. Social hierarchy existed as a result of food surpluses. It was able to support a group of people who did not toil for food.

I see so there was a food surplus and someone just became ruler or some people just became rulers? The question is how did this happen. Surpluses made it possible, no one is denying that.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Kidicious


Maybe after Whitey came and ****ed everything up. Before that he pretty much lived in harmony with nature and there was plenty for everyone.

OK, this is fukking absurd.

[Kidlicious]

btw, there were food surpluses in hunter-gatherer societies where no significant hierarchies developed.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by aneeshm


OK, this is fukking absurd.

It's pretty well accepted that the agricultural societies replaced the hunter-gatherer societies.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Kidicious

I'm sure it made some people's lives better, but it transformed society so that most people ended up having a worse life. It also in my opinion made the world a worse place to live.

That's the entire problem in this thread - you take your opinion on what is a good/better life and turn it into something absolute.

Just that lots of people would disagree with what you see as good/better life.

The entire argument of more or less stress, more or less free time, hierarchical orders or not do not prove in anyway that something is better, since things like stress, work, hierarchy are not things which can be only described as "bad". That's a bit too simple. Stress can also be positive. Work can be a good experience. Hierarchy can help achieving certain things. Fine, they also have a downside, nobody is arguing against that. But so have most things, even the existance as hunter-gatherer.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Arrian

It was my impression, however, that most "traditional" societies were highly intolerant of such things...

-Arrian

Not really true.

There's been a homosexual subculture within India for millennia.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Kidicious


"Hunter-gatherer societies also tend to have non-hierarchical, egalitarian social structures. However, this is usually only the case in the more mobile societies, which generally are not able to store surplus food. "

wiki

Surplus of food is one cause of hierachialism.

Duh!

Any concentration of power is a cause of hierarchy-formation.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by BeBro


That's the entire problem in this thread - you take your opinion on what is a good/better life and turn it into something absolute.

Just that lots of people would disagree with what you see as good/better life.

The entire argument of more or less stress, more or less free time, hierarchical orders or not do not prove in anyway that something is better, since things like stress, work, hierarchy are not things which can be only described as "bad". That's a bit too simple. Stress can also be positive. Work can be a good experience. Hierarchy can help achieving certain things. Fine, they also have a downside, nobody is arguing against that. But so have most things, even the existance as hunter-gatherer.

Sure for some people work, stress and hierarchy aren't that bad, but then they don't work in a sweet shop, or dig threw garbage for a dollar a day.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Maybe after Whitey came and ****ed everything up. Before that he pretty much lived in harmony with nature and there was plenty for everyone.

I sure hope you were being sarcastic.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by LordShiva




I sure hope you were being sarcastic.

Agriculture developed in a lot of different places. Whitey is a general term.

[BeBMan]

Bushmen had no beer. Case closed.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by aneeshm


Duh!

Any concentration of power is a cause of hierarchy-formation.

I don't disagree with that, and I don't know what your point is.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by BeBro
Bushmen had no beer. Case closed.

And beer causes an extreme amount of suffering for millions of families and other victims.

[Saras]

Originally posted by Kidicious


And beer causes an extreme amount of suffering for millions of families and other victims.

Allright, back to ignore.

[BeBMan]

That's nearly sig stuff