Yes I agree with this, especially after reading "Guns, Germs and Steel" and "Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind". We evolved to live in small groups where everyone looked after each other and worked together because it benefited the group directly, whereas now we are separated from our families for most of the day and forced to work with strangers performing mundane tasks.Also, consider that more overcrowding will lead to increased violence. Unless we can do something to address the unsustainable global population increases then I'm afraid we're just going experience more violence. Humans were meant to live in family units with limited interaction with other family units.
"be excellent to each other"
Station"be excellent to each other"
It seems that people still living in "primitive" cultures are a lot happier than "civilised" people and work less.
The agricultural revolution was the point of no return for living in harmony. Now humans are increasingly dependent on distant third parties for food, accommodation, security, raising offspring etc. Autonomy has been lost. The commoditization of time has cost the human race.
A lot of diseases are the result of close contact with livestock and living in constant close proximity to so many other humans. Don't know which ones are barely surviving, but I've seen plenty of tribes in the pacific isles and rain forests who look pretty happy. And any of those people could join the modern world if they wished, so there must be a reason they choose not to.really? they seem to be barely surviving, and dieing of easily curable conditions whenever they're on the tv.
The point is you would not be subsistence farming. There was a reason humans lived as hunter gatherers for 100k+ years. Farming is a lot more work and you are at the whim of the weather/seasons and highly likely to end up starving due to a bad harvest. Hunter gatherers could just move on to another area once food ran out at a particular location.do you really want to be spending your life, subsistence farming a ****** plot of land till you die? it didnt cost humanity it liberated humanity.
A lot of diseases are the result of close contact with livestock and living in constant close proximity to so many other humans. Don't know which ones are barely surviving, but I've seen plenty of tribes in the pacific isles and rain forests who look pretty happy. And any of those people could join the modern world if they wished, so there must be a reason they choose not to.
The point is you would not be subsistence farming. There was a reason humans lived as hunter gatherers for 100k+ years. Farming is a lot more work and you are at the whim of the weather/seasons and highly likely to end up starving due to a bad harvest. Hunter gatherers could just move on to another area once food ran out at a particular location.
the fact they have zero skill and nothing of value outside their small communities meaning leaving is instant poverty?
Does he? Can you prove that?
I'll prove he does when you prove he doesn't
I'll prove he does when you prove he doesn't
I can't sleep, too much work on so i digressed and started pondering the above...
So, what do you reckon?
Could humans ever reach a level of intelligence, emotional or otherwise which meant working together for the greater good prevailed? A world where science trumped religion. Where narrow minded us and them attitutes, nationalism and so forth were no more?
I for one dont hold up much hope I dont understand the psychology behind it(feel free to enlighten) but i believe humans, the masses specifically are inherently drawn towards silos no matter how big or small that they can feel a sense of belonging to. Wether that be religion, a country, a football club... perhaps its a pack thing.
Random and slightly ridiculous chain of thought, i know!