3 ms·

What the hell are you talking about??? Technological civilization arouse because our ancestors living in "small agrarian communities" were tired of living in a

What the hell are you talking about??? Technological civilization arouse because our ancestors living in "small agrarian communities" were tired of living in a nightmare in which their children died like flies and the starved to death periodically every time the climate farted. I'm tired on hearing entitled little sh1ts like you that have lived incredibly pampered lives and don't have a clue of what is like to have to live without a refrigerator, hvac or modern medicine.

bitwize 4y ago
> Technological civilization arouse because our ancestors living in "small agrarian communities" were tired of living in a nightmare in which their children died like flies and the starved to death periodically every time the climate farted. This is what Daniel Quinn calls "living in the hands of the gods". We are not really fit to do anything else. Humans have survived for hundreds of thousands of years living off what the land provides them in its natural course. Civilization will probably not make it much past ten thousand years, if that. So tell me again which is the bigger nightmare: living and dying according to the whims of nature, being one small part in a society that adapts and harmonizes to nature; or the death of billions, and the extermination of considerable amounts of other life, all because we wanted to rule in place of the gods and never learned not to shit where we eat.
- mathlover2 4y ago
  > We are not really fit to do anything else. If you go by that logic we are only fit to live in tropical savannahs in Africa where modern humans originated. What I find supremely arrogant, though, is any Westerner who, while living in comfort and safety amidst high technology, proposes that everyone in the world should just be content with not having the comforts they are currently using (including some, like vaccines and modern medicine, which arguably have vastly less negative effects than PFAS and burning fossil fuels). Anyone actually serious about this philosophy should try as much as possible to make their lifestyles like what they want for everyone. It probably wouldn't convince everyone, but it would certainly earn them a lot more respect.

bitwize 4y ago

> Technological civilization arouse because our ancestors living in "small agrarian communities" were tired of living in a nightmare in which their children died like flies and the starved to death periodically every time the climate farted. This is what Daniel Quinn calls "living in the hands of the gods". We are not really fit to do anything else. Humans have survived for hundreds of thousands of years living off what the land provides them in its natural course. Civilization will probably not make it much past ten thousand years, if that. So tell me again which is the bigger nightmare: living and dying according to the whims of nature, being one small part in a society that adapts and harmonizes to nature; or the death of billions, and the extermination of considerable amounts of other life, all because we wanted to rule in place of the gods and never learned not to shit where we eat.

mathlover2 4y ago
> We are not really fit to do anything else. If you go by that logic we are only fit to live in tropical savannahs in Africa where modern humans originated. What I find supremely arrogant, though, is any Westerner who, while living in comfort and safety amidst high technology, proposes that everyone in the world should just be content with not having the comforts they are currently using (including some, like vaccines and modern medicine, which arguably have vastly less negative effects than PFAS and burning fossil fuels). Anyone actually serious about this philosophy should try as much as possible to make their lifestyles like what they want for everyone. It probably wouldn't convince everyone, but it would certainly earn them a lot more respect.