nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Let's compare human happiness of hunter gatherers VS modern people

badabing106

Humans are physically designed to move, hunt and gather. They were designed to live in communal tribes where everything was shared, even the raring of other people's children

There was no anxiety over property, or money. They shared the physical exiliration of hunting together, the communal joy of providing and sharing food which was either hunted or gathered. The lived continously in the now and in one with nature. They were physically in the peak condition they were designed to be in. Ten times more capable and resilient than modern folk

They had everything that they needed to be content, food, shelter, sexy relations in abundance, sleep, community

The most popular sports today are hunting and gathering a ball, it's in our DNA, like it or not

We are hunter gatherers. We are not happy in modern times. Get on a bus or a train and you will only see sad faces

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

yesto24

Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »

To be honest I have to agree somewhat with the OP.

After I became a bit clinically fed up a couple of years ago I undertook building a log cabin in the woods in the wilderness in Canada. I have to say it was one of the most zen periods of my extremely successful life. Mother earth provided me with sustenance aplenty and my dedication to a strict mindfulness regime nourished my soul. Highly recommended.

Well I'd recommend it for someone who was physically very fit, quite handy, used to the outdoors and with a mature sense of awareness; which rules out most of you to be fair.

While this might have been a fulfilling adventure for you.
I would give a guess you didn't do it in Canada's winter and it was all set up for you.
You didn't do it naked, you had a few sets of modern durable clothing and waterproof boots.
You didn't make your tools they were provided.
You were never in any danger, either from wild animals or starvation, you were never going to die on this trip. It would have been bad for future sales.
Don't fool yourself, it might have been a taste of "wilderness living" but it was the Disney version.
Not a bad thing, you seem to have got something out of it, but no where near what you think you experienced.
And a million miles from the scenario the OP is talking about.

And on that, I remember watching on TV where they showed what food was available to such hunter gatherers in the north of England during winter. It wasn't much and it didn't look good.
If I recall correctly it was a drink made from the only available berries at that time of year. And there wasn't many of them around.
Thinking about this you can see why the seasons, day length and the celebrations we have with them came about. And it is no bad thing to remember them it gives an insight as to how our culture arose.
Our evolution has almost certainly been overtaken by technology but there is no way it would have been easier mentally and physically then compared to now

[Deleted User]

We are way happier now. Debating the merits of Louise O’Neill’s articles in AH, putting up smart comments on Twitter, posting photos of ourselves that people are obliged to praise on Facebook, these are all things hunter gatherers could not do.

Cupcake_Crisis

They had no WiFi. They must have been miserable

Twenty Grand

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

People didn’t see 50 year olds as very old 150 years ago.

You have to control for child mortality as a previous poster said. Jefferson and Adams survived to be 80+

Even the bible suggests 70 years as our time on earth.

Jefferson and Adams were rich and famous. As we're many other people who you hear living to a ripe old age.
The Bible isn't an accurate source.
Sure, maybe people could live to 70. If they didn't die of injury, disease, childbirth or any one of the million other ways to die. Many people live to well over 100 today, but 70 year olds are still considered elderly today regardless.

Hammer89

_Brian wrote: »

Think they had a life Expectancy of about 25-28, probably die horrific painful death from some sort of infection from a thorn or mauled by a wolf.

Modern life expectancy must be 75, in general we suffer very little, very few of us get eaten when on our daily commute and if you ignore the moaning pansies we have quite a cushie lifestyle.

So cushy that most of us probably take it for granted. If life expectancy was that low back in the day then perhaps there would've been a greater appreciation for their own existence because, as you say, there's constant danger where it could be taken away from them suddenly.

Twenty Grand

Hammer89 wrote: »

So cushy that most of us probably take it for granted. If life expectancy was that low back in the day then perhaps there would've been a greater appreciation for their own existence because, as you say, there's constant danger where it could be taken away from them suddenly.

Id say there were so busy working to lengthen their existence, they didn't have time to appreciate it.

Or maybe it's all relative. If 100 years from now, the life expectancy is 500, will people then say the same of us now?

dartboardio

super_furry wrote: »

Living in a ditch, subsisting on a diet of twigs and berries, dying of old age at 35 if you don’t die of a septic thumb when you cut it on a rock.

Think I’m alright as I am right now thanks.

And there you have it, septic thumb. We’ve turned into weak people! I’d almost rather being able to communicate properly as humans than the modern world

Lirange

If human DNA is anything to go by then the Hunter Gatherer societies were far from the idyllic alternative to modern human life that the OP suggests. Humans experienced several genetic bottlenecks during the Hunter Gatherer era. When you have small or isolated populations it causes genetic drift...accelerated mutation at the cellular level. This phenomena is one of nature's survival tools. Human populations experienced severe attrition that you just don't see today...not even the great plagues of the middle ages ushered in such levels of widespread attenuation.

_Kaiser_

Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »

To be honest I have to agree somewhat with the OP.

After I became a bit clinically fed up a couple of years ago I undertook building a log cabin in the woods in the wilderness in Canada. I have to say it was one of the most zen periods of my extremely successful life.......

theemigrant wrote: »

What part of canada, i would absolutely love to do something similar.

yesto24 wrote: »

While this might have been a fulfilling adventure for you.
I would give a guess you didn't do it in Canada's winter and it was all set up for you.....

He's not serious guys.. it's a "comedy" routine about how successful his life is etc that shows up in AH every so often.

Are Am Eye

From a biological or neurological point of view you can only be so happy anyway. Or so unhappy. It's broadly ups and downs within a range - leaving pathologies aside. You could transplant somebody into a very different environment and circumstances and they would still experience the same range and variations of emotions and ups and downs. Only maybe over different things.

Donald Trump

_Brian wrote: »

Think they had a life Expectancy of about 25-28, probably die horrific painful death from some sort of infection from a thorn or mauled by a wolf.

Modern life expectancy must be 75, in general we suffer very little, very few of us get eaten when on our daily commute and if you ignore the moaning pansies we have quite a cushie lifestyle.

Well apart from the poor divils who are unfortunate enough to break down while driving through Leitrim and are happened across by some of the cannibalistic local tribes

yesto24

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

He's not serious guys.. it's a "comedy" routine about how successful his life is etc that shows up in AH every so often.

Oh I know that.
Just pointing out a few things so he can up his game.

Anyone else think aongus and Johnnyflash are the same?

somefeen

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

He's not serious guys.. it's a "comedy" routine about how successful his life is etc that shows up in AH every so often.

You're just jealous of Mr Bismarck's success.

Andrea B.

badabing106 wrote: »

Humans are physically designed to move, hunt and gather. They were designed to live in communal tribes where everything was shared, even the raring of other people's children

There was no anxiety over property, or money. They shared the physical exiliration of hunting together, the communal joy of providing and sharing food which was either hunted or gathered. The lived continously in the now and in one with nature. They were physically in the peak condition they were designed to be in. Ten times more capable and resilient than modern folk

They had everything that they needed to be content, food, shelter, sexy relations in abundance, sleep, community

The most popular sports today are hunting and gathering a ball, it's in our DNA, like it or not

We are hunter gatherers. We are not happy in modern times. Get on a bus or a train and you will only see sad faces

You have read Sapiens then? This topic makes up a large portion of the book. Excellent read.

Your Face

The evidence from archaeology would suggest that the OPs notions are very wrong.

odyssey06

I think humans are better disposed to handle the stresses of hunter gatherer life, its challenges are what we were built for.
There are many problems in modern life due to this mis-match between our hunter gatherer blueprint and the reality of life today.
But in terms of happiness, I think modern people are ahead, both at the individual level and the fact that modern life affords to opportunity for far more humans to pursue their happiness.

Plus, if everything was hunky dory in hunter gatherer land why aren't we still doing that?

I would probably prefer to be a hunter gatherer over a medieval peasant, but modern life wins out overall.

odyssey06

The peak population for hunter gatherers appears to have been 10 - 20 million humans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population_estimates

I don't like those odds.

fyfe79

odyssey06 wrote: »

I think humans are better disposed to handle the stresses of hunter gatherer life, its challenges are what we were built for.
There are many problems in modern life due to this mis-match between our hunter gatherer blueprint and the reality of life today.
But in terms of happiness, I think modern people are ahead, both at the individual level and the fact that modern life affords to opportunity for far more humans to pursue their happiness.

Plus, if everything was hunky dory in hunter gatherer land why aren't we still doing that?

I would probably prefer to be a hunter gatherer over a medieval peasant, but modern life wins out overall.

Genuine question, does anyone know if there is any evidence of depression/suicide in hunter-gatherers?

If capitalism or social conventualism has led to this mis-match, then maybe there's some truth so the notion that we're not living our lives correctly at all - we're all going against our very instinct and some hit the self-destruct button as a release.

briany

odyssey06 wrote: »

I think humans are better disposed to handle the stresses of hunter gatherer life, its challenges are what we were built for.
There are many problems in modern life due to this mis-match between our hunter gatherer blueprint and the reality of life today.
But in terms of happiness, I think modern people are ahead, both at the individual level and the fact that modern life affords to opportunity for far more humans to pursue their happiness.

Plus, if everything was hunky dory in hunter gatherer land why aren't we still doing that?

I would probably prefer to be a hunter gatherer over a medieval peasant, but modern life wins out overall.

I think humans will, broadly speaking, strive to make life easier for themselves. If you could reboot humanity back to a geographically diverse set of tribes, living a simple hunter gatherer lifestyle, I think it would develop pretty much the same way up to what we have now over a roughly similar amount of time.

Werner Herzog did a short documentary on hitherto uncontacted tribes in the Amazon. He found that within a generation of contact being made, their young folk were off to live in the cities, and were sort of embarrassed about their people who'd stayed behind.

RobbingBandit

Bop life partner on the head and carry them away ah those nobel savages sure we're crafty.

Arghus

Life would have been a non-stop horrible experience for hunter gathers.

Get a grip man.

odyssey06

fyfe79 wrote: »

Genuine question, does anyone know if there is any evidence of depression/suicide in hunter-gatherers?
If capitalism or social conventualism has led to this mis-match, then maybe there's some truth so the notion that we're not living our lives correctly at all - we're all going against our very instinct and some hit the self-destruct button as a release.

I think it would be very difficult to establish that.

There was a version of almost what we would call euthanasia for older members of pre-contact Eskimo society:
http://www.theinitialjourney.com/features/eskimos-old-age/

These days the cry for help might be take enough painkiller so you have to go to hospital in an ambulance without taking enough, you think, to complete the job.
If a depressed hunter gatherer wandered off alone as a 'cry for help' and nobody came looking for him, then body may never be found. Probably scavengers would get the body. A story might be told in the village of possession by a demon.

odyssey06

Interesting article on the subject from the Economist:
"The era of the hunter-gatherer was not the social and environmental Eden that some suggest."
https://www.economist.com/node/10278703

odyssey06

Arghus wrote: »

Life would have been a non-stop horrible experience for hunter gathers. Get a grip man.

Was life a non-stop horrible experience for pre-contact Native Americans or Australian Aborigines? It wasn't a picnic, and it could involve (and end) in a horrible experience, but I haven't seen evidence to suggest that it was non-stop horrible. I think an average day of hunter gatherer life would trump the same as a slave in an agricultural civilisation and probably that of a serf.

Twenty Grand

odyssey06 wrote: »

Was life a non-stop horrible experience for pre-contact Native Americans or Australian Aborigines? It wasn't a picnic, and it could involve (and end) in a horrible experience, but I haven't seen evidence to suggest that it was non-stop horrible. I think an average day of hunter gatherer life would trump the same as a slave in an agricultural civilisation and probably that of a serf.

Farmers had more food, more free time to pursue other activities and rear children weren't exposed to the elements and didn't have to always keep moving.

Jared Diamonds book Guns Germs and Steel puts the reason the Indians and Aborigines didn't develop as down to a lack of farmable crops and domesticated animals. They didn't advance because they didn't want to, they couldn't advance, at least not as fast as Europeans.

Naos

badabing106 wrote: »

Humans are physically designed to move, hunt and gather. They were designed to live in communal tribes where everything was shared, even the raring of other people's children

There was no anxiety over property, or money. They shared the physical exiliration of hunting together, the communal joy of providing and sharing food which was either hunted or gathered. The lived continously in the now and in one with nature. They were physically in the peak condition they were designed to be in. Ten times more capable and resilient than modern folk

They had everything that they needed to be content, food, shelter, sexy relations in abundance, sleep, community

The most popular sports today are hunting and gathering a ball, it's in our DNA, like it or not

We are hunter gatherers. We are not happy in modern times. Get on a bus or a train and you will only see sad faces

How are those first few chapters of 'Sapiens' treating you?

odyssey06

Twenty Grand wrote: »

Farmers had more food, more free time to pursue other activities and rear children weren't exposed to the elements and didn't have to always keep moving.

Jared Diamonds book Guns Germs and Steel puts the reason the Indians and Aborigines didn't develop as down to a lack of farmable crops and domesticated animals. They didn't advance because they didn't want to, they couldn't advance, at least not as fast as Europeans.

Jared diamond called agriculture the worst mistake in human history!

Not sure if I totally agree.

The aztecs and incas had agriculture. They had no domestic animals because their hunter gatherer ancestors wiped out so many of the continents large animals.

Were they any happier pre contact than hunter gatherers in north america or australia?

Naos

Twenty Grand wrote: »

Farmers had more food, more free time to pursue other activities and rear children weren't exposed to the elements and didn't have to always keep moving.

Jared Diamonds book Guns Germs and Steel puts the reason the Indians and Aborigines didn't develop as down to a lack of farmable crops and domesticated animals. They didn't advance because they didn't want to, they couldn't advance, at least not as fast as Europeans.

The book Sapiens has a good spin on this.

Farming enslaved us.

Before farming, humans were free to roam the lands and they survived. Once we started farming, we were locked down to the land - having to work it night & day in order to survive. Families had more children because they could sustain them due to increase crop yields, but this only increased food demands which meant people had to work harder & longer.

Disease developed due to large numbers of people living in close proximity to one another.

Etc. etc.

the_syco

Ipso wrote: »

Would vegans just be gatherers?

They'd be dead.

Arghus

odyssey06 wrote: »

Was life a non-stop horrible experience for pre-contact Native Americans or Australian Aborigines? It wasn't a picnic, and it could involve (and end) in a horrible experience, but I haven't seen evidence to suggest that it was non-stop horrible. I think an average day of hunter gatherer life would trump the same as a slave in an agricultural civilisation and probably that of a serf.

I'll take my modern day ennui over women commonly dying in childbirth, people being sacrificed to appease the Gods and a life expectancy of 30, if you were doing real well.