How is life better or improved from when humans were uncivilized back around 20,000-30000 BCE?

Question

I mean to say, that sure we have more technology, more treatments to diseases, more arts in general. But along with that human nature is still the same... its not like humans faulty nature is changing from one person to another. In order to survive we compete... so did the nomads. The core of the human mind is yet the same, its like people's exteriors change, but they themselves remain the same, so what are some good reason of trying to explore more, and do more research, when we all no that there are no way to get any answers. We still live and die... wouldnt it be better if we just enjoy our lives like nomads? Seems like we are just accostomed to this way of life.. therefore we are more materalistic... or basic needs in life are food, water, and sex... so, why should life be so complicated?

no one knows what the are ultimately trying to achieve as they build, sure they build, but thier own purpose are mostly different than others. Some build for thier own selfishness.. others build for "god" and some build for others. Others dont know why they are here, nor do they question.. but they are far from human, but they still build. Thats alright and thats not what i was getting at.. all i'm saying is building is not nessary. We can suffice with food, water, and sex... other animals do, but our nature is constructive and destructive... at the same.. so therefore we are.. we're never gonna resort to the simple life.. But in the simple life.. was were the competition started anyways.. i'm sure that there were trible leaders later on.. and dominant male and females.. i'm just questioning.. if competition is moral? and is there a way to get rid of most of it?

Answer 1

It hasn't
I'm a big Fan of Nietzsche for this.
He basically stated that civilisation corrupts man. And he's right. If you were to check with most primitive cultures alive today you would see that they hardly know violence, crime, war etc. they have nothing to fight about, because basically they have next to nothing. they live in tribal societies in a close bond and are happy this way. They only work to provide in their means and for the rest of the time they spend time with each other. Now tell me would you not be willing to give up the little good that we have achieved. and at the same time eliminate all the useless and bad. To be able to live like this

Answer 2

I think the buzz word is "competition", with one of the facets of that being "one-upmanship". People are competitive by nature, and that hasn't changed throughout the centuries of arts, knowledge and technology. One has only to look to the political scene to know that this is true. There is so much back-biting and mud-slinging in political campaigns, that voters are hard pressed to know which candidate is better. There is competition in scholastics, with one student always trying to succeed another. There is competition in the work force, with major attempts to climb the corporate ladder. There is competition between siblings, between married couples, between friends. In short, life itself is a competitive experience. Even the Olympic games are not devoid of some underhandedness to obtain that coveted gold medal. So to answer your question, the complication occurs because human nature being what it is, would never be content with the mere basic needs -- we always want to excel in everything. Believe it or not, I think the nomads had the answer to peace and serenity because they accepted their life conditions the way they were.

Research is a valuable tool, as it does find cures for diseases and extends the longevity and the quality of life. I'm not saying that competition is a bad thing, or that it is an exercise in futility as you seem to indicate. However, I'd rather see a scientist be more concerned with finding a cure than trying to see who will be first to find said cure. And that, in a nutshell, is what's wrong with civilization today! Good question! Thanks for asking.

Answer 3

If we use your thesis of just using our basic needs in life, as food water and sex...wow...I think you might find 90 percent of humanity dead. For you view the world from a perceptive of the now and not the then. You are sitting thousands upon thousands of year away looking at basic needs but you do not have any knowledge or concept of how to obtain those basic needs and what the reality of the life and land was then.
Certainly one would think mankind would not be so materialist and just be in a wonderful world, but it is not that way.

In reality, we do not just live and die, each of us is a building block and indicant to the design of man, as we progress ever so slowly as it seems, we are re working the inter consciousness that makes us human and with that will come the full awareness that we are neither material man needing materiality to sustain our lives, but that we are spiritual beings coming into a higher reality that will transform humanity into the spiritual being he is meant to be, never believing in the dream of dying and thus transforming the world into a newer higher concept of Mankind.

Never going back to solve the problems of today is advisable, never wish for that which you might find come true because your reality lies in your mind. Be careful for you are a guardian to the future.

Answer 4

I think your observations are correct. Life is not better now. Maybe we are more "civilized", but we are just as human now as we were thousands of years ago. The real issue here is whether we are evolving and developing consciously. There is no single plan that caused us to create the world we live in today. This is the result of the sum of all humanity. It is not like we have a choice about it. This is the result of many individual choices.

Answer 5

Toothpaste.

Answer 6

It isn't,