I'm not saying that if you have a time machine and have to choose whether to hop in or not, that it would be better. But it's really worth stopping and realizin

I'm not saying that if you have a time machine and have to choose whether to hop in or not, that it would be better. But it's really worth stopping and realizing how many of the problems solved by modernity, were also caused by modernity! For example, for some weird reason you are obsessed with dentists. Read this then: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/oral-mystery-are-agriculture-and-rates-responsible-for-tooth-decay/#:~:text=But%20the%20study%20of%20human,changed%20to%20an%20agricultural%20lifestyle https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/oral-mystery-are-.... Cavities were probably rare before agriculture. Same goes for antibiotics -- infections were a lot rarer before agriculture concentrated much larger population densities AND put them next to birds to catch respiratory illnesses from. Population density was basically a health hazard from 10,000 years ago to really, really recently, when modern plumbing finally solved it once and for all. Finally, humanity arose in an area where cold was not a major issue. There are still plenty of areas like that. And of course, food shortages historically are almost always associated with agriculture -- it's not surprising that intensively cultivating land to force it to sustain a much larger population would also be much more precarious. How could you possibly have a shortage if there's 10 or 100 times as many calories available in the area as are needed? It's in agriculture, where you only grow about what you need, because you allow the population to reach the maximum that can be supported, and force a large portion of them to work hard all their days to support as big an army as possible to conquer more land and repeat the cycle.... yeah, you become very vulnerable to small problems. It seems like a lot of the problems of modernity are scaling problems -- problems you only run into when you insist on a much higher population density. We have been busily solving them for millenia, and by today, yeah, I'd pick today over 10,000 years ago. But don't kid yourself. There were plenty of generations in the 1300s who would have loved to trade places with hunter gatherers in a rich habitat with a low population density. This is the subtlety you are missing.