4 ms·
That's not exactly the same thing. Back when humans were hunter gatherers there was a lot more forest and a lot more fauna to eat. You also had a tribe that stu
by TFYS 7y ago
That's not exactly the same thing. Back when humans were hunter gatherers there was a lot more forest and a lot more fauna to eat. You also had a tribe that stuck with you for life. Modern inventions weren't known back then so you wouldn't even know how to miss them. There was less work to do and the work you did had real meaning. It's completely possible that life was better for the average person back then.
- jotm 7y agoQuite likely better subjectively, just like today's poor villagers in remote areas seem pretty happy. Objectively, it's a tough, limited life imo.
- Nasrudith 7y agoMore fauna with hunter gatherers? They were causing mass extinctions since they picked up spears! The whole reason they were usually 8nomadic was because they depleted local food supplies and had to move on. Once they had better nutrition (the source of huge barbarian myths) but agriculture has advanced far past that now.
- jessaustin 7y agoYou're really wrong about this. Pack hunters, such as wolves, lions, or early humans, do affect local prey populations in temporary ways, but they don't destroy ecosystems. Agriculture does destroy ecosystems.