You mean like manually powered farming, sewing, and transportation devices? Holistic medicine? They use science and technology but they limit what they can and cannot use.
Science , did it make a difference ?
- Thread starter Bluecrux
- Start date
You mean like manually powered farming, sewing, and transportation devices? Holistic medicine? They use science and technology but they limit what they can and cannot use.
I don't know ..and that's why I was asking. I don't know how much science and technology they actually use ....do you?
Baron Max
Well we have the power to destroy them, so they are below us, right?
They don't "prosper".
Bluecrux specified the dictionary definition.
What advances are these cultures making?
I do. In fact many Amish communities use batteries to power small appliances and gasoline generators (mainly to recharge the batteries). Heck, Amish women often go to local hospitals to give birth.
Doesn't sound like they use very much "science and technology", does it? I seriously doubt that giving up the battery thingies would make any difference in their lives .....and the Amish thrive and seem quite content.
Baron Max
They use (and make) alot of manual-mechanical devices. Their farming techniques are based on science. Think about it this way... if they weren't using science and technology they probably would all be running around naked in the wilderness.
Fraggle Rocker
Staff member
The Amish take advantage of their status as a little cultural museum surrounded by the world's most prosperous civilization. They don't have refrigerators and ranges and washer-dryers and the things that make women's lives easier, but the men use gasoline-engined farm equipment and they're happy to ride in somebody else's car when they're going someplace beyond the range of a horse-drawn buggy. They avail themselves of modern medicine without hesitation and their absolute favorite artifact of the Industrial Revolution is the banking industry. They're very capable managers and they run several factories that sell cool stuff to "The English." There's one right here in Maryland making some strange kind of heater that they advertise on the--gasp--internet. They've been investing their profits for more than a century and they're generally acknowledged as being an extremely wealthy people due to the selective way they exploit the system they claim to disdain, and to the way they play on our nostalgia as the cute little Hobbit-like village. It's quite possible that the per-capita wealth of the Amish community in America is greater than that of Beverly Hills, but they still make their wives wring out the clothes and cook with wood stoves.
The Amish have lived here for a century and a half and they have large families. Yet there's no signs of a population explosion in Amish country. Apparently quite a few of those children vote with their feet and assimilate.
With a very few exceptions like the Amazon tribes we occasionally discover, they've all been exposed to civilization and it has changed them. You're not too far from the Hopi reservation, one of the tribes you're talking about who steadfastly cling to the old ways. Have you driven through there? The problem with civilization is that it's practically impossible for people who don't want it to stay away from it. Fathers want metal tools, mothers want medicine for their children, the children want iPods. In other words it's not quite true that they don't want it.
Everyone would love to just take the parts they like from any particular technology and not have to deal with the down side. Well guess what? Civilization is a technology.
Even I have to admit that after their encounters with civilization, the world's remaining Neolithic and Mesolithic tribes are worse off than they were before. We gave them our diseases, then we turned around and gave them our antibiotics and vaccines, so instead of every family having three children survive to adulthood they've got eight. We colonized their land, drew arbitrary lines on a map, combined fragments of tribes who had nothing in common but mutual hatred into "nations," then said we were sorry and left them to "find democracy in their own way." We treat them like Disneyland, throwing money around, taking photos, training their sons to be pickpockets and their daughters to be prostitutes.
In other words, they were never really able to "live in the same way as they've lived for generations ....and mostly without science and technology," so it's hard to answer your question about a null set.
Finally, some of the developed nations have begun to develop consciences, but it's too late for most of these people to regain their old ways.
All we can do is wonder whether they'd be happier if we'd left them alone. Considering that the people in Neolithic villages on the outskirts of civilizations have always migrated in large numbers to those cities, even when there was still a vast wilderness to fall back to, the only answer we have is that they seem to think they'll be happier here. For most people for most of history, it was their choice.
Maybe so, given some of the directions that science has taken--but would we be truly Human if we din't investigate things? Curiousity may kill or damage us, but we still have the urge to explore, regardless.
Depends on how far back you go:
(Sorry for the Wiki source)
A forty hour work week equates to approximately 2000 hours per year. So, by this particular, isolated indicator, people were better off in the 14th century then the 1980's. It would appear that the worst peaked out in the beginning of the industrial revolution (early to mid 19th century). I thought I remembered reading somewhere that "modern" man works longer hours than our ancestors, so took the time to look it up.
Otherwise - Excellent post, Fraggle! We are totally better off because of science and the comforts it povides!
One thing "wrong" about those working hours - if go back to before the invention of artificial lighting then farmers and and other outdoor could only "work" during daylight hours - one complaint against British Summer Time is that regardless of what the clock tells you you work when when it's light and you don't when it's dark.
And then there's the nature of the work...
I suggest humbly that an office worker in the 80s had a somewhat easier time of it than a 14th Century manual worker (which was about all there was to do in those days).
Weather being one one factor.
And then there's the nature of the work...
I suggest humbly that an office worker in the 80s had a somewhat easier time of it than a 14th Century manual worker (which was about all there was to do in those days).
Weather being one one factor.
Bak 50 years ago when i was a kid... it was good times... happyness was easy enuff to com by.!!!
I remenber makin a crane out of a couple of sticks of wood an a strang an a empty thread-spool (to crank the strang on) to make the crane move up an down (loved that toy)... an i even made a 3 foot square boat i was gonna drag down to the lake about a mile away... an i remenber som azz-hole comin along an say it woudn float becaus water woud lean in the cracks... but i was gonna shove tar in the cracks so i knew that wasnt a prollem... but it didnt work out after all cause i cooud only find enuff bords for the botom an 3 sides... but the thang that realy killed my plans was that it was so heavy i coud barly drag it at all... bummer.!!!
But i lived thru good times an always had decent clothes an good food ect... however tryin to sleep on som of them hot muggy summer nites was a bich... but i dout that kids today was any happer than i was... but 1 thang thats much beter now days is pane managment... for instence... bak then ther was a nabor lady dyin of cancer an she was horribly bloated an in agony for several days befor she dyed... so all in all i druther take my chanses on findin happyness in these mor modern times than bak then.!!!
So that's it! I've heard that chronic abuse of oxycodone, hydrocodone and morphine could adversely affect one's ability to spell and use proper grammar. Why didn't you just tell us about your handicap in the beginning, Clueless? We’re a very understanding bunch here at SF…
We’re a very understanding bunch here at SF…
Thanks... but what do you thank of my concluson about pane managment???... which is:::
Out of all the thangs listed in this thred... i thank pane managment is the number 1 reason which makes livin in mor modern times... beter.!!!
We evolved science? What does that mean? Besides the obvious.
lol, i just typed a long rant and then hit ctrl+r on accident; DOH!
Anyway, I mostly agree with Fraggle & co. Your life/happiness is what you make of it.
I personally believe (from my research & experience) that technology is the cause of a lot of problems, but it's also the cause of a lot of solutions. Pros/cons really are relative and dependent on a point of a view. There are a lot of old traditions and beliefs and maxims that are being uprooted by a wreckless, postmodern world, and there are a lot of silly, overly-serious, & superstitious beliefs/maxims that are being eased by a more relaxed, innovative, and open-minded world, etc. etc. And that's just how I see it.
For example, the idea of becoming transhuman and replacing our fragile parts with robotics is totally anathema to many people. And maybe for a while (just like with all the crazy prescription drugs these days) there will be TONS of problems with them and it will be a sick joke. Or maybe it's just the next step in our "evolution." Put another way: maybe the cure for depression is better nutrition, better social life, and physical activity---not prozac. People mention chemical imbalances, but why couldn't malnutrition, lack of social life, and lack of physical activity be the cause of the imbalance? However, what's wrong with taking a lot of drugs? I would argue that it costs way too much money and uses precious resources unnecessarily, but that's because I believe in sustainability. Maybe we're just supposed to use what we want and move on? Why do we need to keep nature in balance? Evolutionarily speaking, we can keep doing what we're doin and the world will adapt (even if adaptation means going supernova). It's all just beliefs. The idea that humanity should take care of each other and the earth is just one ideology (which I follow). But whether or not it's correct? that's your call.
From an evolutionary point of view, it seems as though technology makes us weak, dependent, and focus too little on having fun--too much on working harder to make something better (the Athenian complex: always advancing). I would absolutely trade huge TVs and mini-iPods, etc. to work less hours/week and spend more time hanging with friends and family and exploring my surroundings. Yet that lifestyle is easily destroyable, as evidenced by the fact that our world is run by the strongest nations, not the kindest. So while I generally feel that I'd rather be killed promoting/living as joyous a life as possible, rather than compromise that joy for security/fear, part of me also wants to survive (with vim).
So then you get creative like Fraggle suggests; why does it have to be simple & enjoyable vs. complex & miserable? Psychologically, because you're perhaps surrounded by people who feel that way. That's why the "greats" are so elevated, because they dared to be different in times when they had to sacrifice a lot to be that way. Not believing in God back in the day is like hanging out with a bunch of "intellectuals" and believing in God today; atheism is the trendy belief these days (it seems), and therefore people who believe in "higher powers", especially an all-knowing bearded male, etc. are made fun of and laughed at, even though science still can't explain First Cause.
I digress; creativity: use technology to your advantage. Take what you like about it and use it, and don't use what you don't like. If you feel unsatisfied being on the computer all the time, then maybe you should get off the computer! Use it when you're craving stimulation you can't get from your local environment; don't use it if you feel bogged down by it.
And it takes bravery because you could be right or wrong (or neither). You could say "f*ck technology" and be noticeably happier than all the techphiles, or you could be noticeably duller. Or vice versa. Or worse: duller but deluding yourself you're happier. Or something totally different.
Haha, anyway, you get the gist of my rambling.
And you all might enjoy this: h t t p : / / w i l d r o o t s . o r g
...especially the "brochure" on 'rewilding': h t t p : / / w w w . g r e e n a n a r c h y . i n f o / GA16 _rewilding.pdf
cheers,
gM
Anyway, I mostly agree with Fraggle & co. Your life/happiness is what you make of it.
I personally believe (from my research & experience) that technology is the cause of a lot of problems, but it's also the cause of a lot of solutions. Pros/cons really are relative and dependent on a point of a view. There are a lot of old traditions and beliefs and maxims that are being uprooted by a wreckless, postmodern world, and there are a lot of silly, overly-serious, & superstitious beliefs/maxims that are being eased by a more relaxed, innovative, and open-minded world, etc. etc. And that's just how I see it.
For example, the idea of becoming transhuman and replacing our fragile parts with robotics is totally anathema to many people. And maybe for a while (just like with all the crazy prescription drugs these days) there will be TONS of problems with them and it will be a sick joke. Or maybe it's just the next step in our "evolution." Put another way: maybe the cure for depression is better nutrition, better social life, and physical activity---not prozac. People mention chemical imbalances, but why couldn't malnutrition, lack of social life, and lack of physical activity be the cause of the imbalance? However, what's wrong with taking a lot of drugs? I would argue that it costs way too much money and uses precious resources unnecessarily, but that's because I believe in sustainability. Maybe we're just supposed to use what we want and move on? Why do we need to keep nature in balance? Evolutionarily speaking, we can keep doing what we're doin and the world will adapt (even if adaptation means going supernova). It's all just beliefs. The idea that humanity should take care of each other and the earth is just one ideology (which I follow). But whether or not it's correct? that's your call.
From an evolutionary point of view, it seems as though technology makes us weak, dependent, and focus too little on having fun--too much on working harder to make something better (the Athenian complex: always advancing). I would absolutely trade huge TVs and mini-iPods, etc. to work less hours/week and spend more time hanging with friends and family and exploring my surroundings. Yet that lifestyle is easily destroyable, as evidenced by the fact that our world is run by the strongest nations, not the kindest. So while I generally feel that I'd rather be killed promoting/living as joyous a life as possible, rather than compromise that joy for security/fear, part of me also wants to survive (with vim).
So then you get creative like Fraggle suggests; why does it have to be simple & enjoyable vs. complex & miserable? Psychologically, because you're perhaps surrounded by people who feel that way. That's why the "greats" are so elevated, because they dared to be different in times when they had to sacrifice a lot to be that way. Not believing in God back in the day is like hanging out with a bunch of "intellectuals" and believing in God today; atheism is the trendy belief these days (it seems), and therefore people who believe in "higher powers", especially an all-knowing bearded male, etc. are made fun of and laughed at, even though science still can't explain First Cause.
I digress; creativity: use technology to your advantage. Take what you like about it and use it, and don't use what you don't like. If you feel unsatisfied being on the computer all the time, then maybe you should get off the computer! Use it when you're craving stimulation you can't get from your local environment; don't use it if you feel bogged down by it.
And it takes bravery because you could be right or wrong (or neither). You could say "f*ck technology" and be noticeably happier than all the techphiles, or you could be noticeably duller. Or vice versa. Or worse: duller but deluding yourself you're happier. Or something totally different.
Haha, anyway, you get the gist of my rambling.
And you all might enjoy this: h t t p : / / w i l d r o o t s . o r g
...especially the "brochure" on 'rewilding': h t t p : / / w w w . g r e e n a n a r c h y . i n f o / GA16 _rewilding.pdf
cheers,
gM
Of course science made a difference. But as to the happiness factor, I doubt science has really any effect on it. Life is what you make it. I think that I could be happy without technology (assuming I'm not sick). I don't think people's attitudes have changed really, we're probably just as happy/miserable as the people of yesteryear, it's just caused by different things.