Were older tribal soceties more functional than ours?

Question

Did they have masses of cancer,mental disorders,massacres,high stress,overworked offices,suicide epidemics etc or I am just being naive.

Why is our society considered more evolved and functional??

By functional I mean is the society supporting itself emotionally,physically,it is operating well.

"1 farmer can feed 20,000 people in one year. whereas in the past 1 farmer could feed 6 people"

A small society would have no need to feed 20,000 people,is a society as large as ours functional,does it work.

Answer 1

Believe it or not, today's western society, is, on the whole, more peaceful than most ancient societies. We live longer, don't have to fight for our food, have more efficient farming practices. We get more cancers and heart disease at an age that older tribes could only dream of reaching. People died much earlier then - tribal "elders" were about 40 years old in tribal societies. Define "functional". They were simple in structure, you had a chief of some sort, some elders, some animals, then the male-child production factories, also known as women. That is how some tribal societies structured themselves, out of necessity. Nothing romantic like equality. I'm sure that if you looked back at tribal wars of the American Indians and Maoris of New Zealand you would find many massacres occurred between the tribes. Violence today is just better reported, not necessarily more prevalent.
As for stress-free, try to sleep easily in a tent when you know that another tribe is on the warpath against you.

Answer 2

I think American society has A LOT of stress. Everything has to be done on time, there are deadlines, be at work by this time, be home by this time. Then there is traffic everyone needs to get to work then back to their families. Almost everyone NEEDS their cup of coffee, they can't do without it.

But that is what comes with capitalism. Everyone is competing and you have to work fast. You always have to be one step ahead of everyone else.

With a small group of people its always help everyone for the survival of the tribe. The only real concern is food and defense of the tribe. No rushing to work, to getting stuck in traffic, no getting hassled by your boss.

The problem is that tribal societies can only stay harmonious and functional if that tribe remains small.

Also there is no drive for making anything new, there is no competition for new inventions. We would be set back hundreds of years. Everything develops out of competition, which comes with population.

I guess the older tribal societies were sort of communist, because everything belonged to the tribe and was distributed evenly. But it is very hard to keep that constant with a high population, and because of human nature.

Its competition that drives everyone. If microsoft was the only company out there would we have iPods? No.

Our society is considered more evolved and functional because of its efficiency. We can get so much done with such a large population. And we have so much new technology with the competition. I think our society sacrifices mental health and peace of mind for competition and productivity.

I dislike the fact that so many people are stressed out. That people need coffee just to get through the day. That people face such pressures that can cause one to snap and massacre people.

At this point I have no idea what i am talking about, I have been rambling on for a while so I will answer the question.

In terms of productivity older societies were not nearly as functional as ours. Maybe in terms of peace of mind and a stress free environment they are better.

But then again not everyone is stressed out.
Ignorance is Bliss- all ancient peoples cared about was staying alive

Answer 3

There was cancer back in the day, but we live longer now than we did back in the day, so we have more chances for things to go wrong. Our population levels are also much higher in almost every area of the world (a possible exception would be Central America, but that's another topic entirely). There is more cancer now, but it is more a function of us living longer (and, to a degree, having more carcinogens).

Mental disorders are interesting because some really to stem from a problem in the brain or malnutrition, but others are just what society decides that it does not like (ie homosexuality, which was just in the past thirty years removed from the official list of mental disorders). It would be difficult to determine whether or not there are more mental problems now than in the past for these reasons.

Epidemics definitely happened in the past (think the plague). In countries with access to relatively good medical care and sanitation, today epidemics are not a huge problem. In areas without access to good medical care and sanitation, epidemics are a huge problem. At the moment, it is a problem of economic disparity.

Stress would have still existed (think crop failures, the inability to locate the herd of animals one hunts for food, etc), especially in times of food shortage. I wouldn't categorize life in the past as easy by any means. I think in some areas (impoverished areas) we face similar problems, and in areas with better access to resources, the problems have changed into something more related to living above subsistence level. One cannot just feed one's family, one must look good doing it and make enough to have extra belongings and such.

Our society is not considered more evolved and functional so much as different and more complex. The complexity comes more from the enormous number of people involved than from some sort of upward evolutionary trajectory of societies. As more people become involved in a system, the system becomes more complex.

As far as functionality goes, I would say that we have more stuff (technology, extra goods, etc), but we are still quite inefficient. In the United States, tons of extra food are produced each year, but not used, while there are people both within and without the country who are starving. Some of this food is not approved for human consumption due to having been genetically modified for cattle feed or oil or other such things (most gm foods are not approved for human consumption at the moment).

Answer 4

ok, yes they did have all those things, but they usually considered it evil magic. but what the heck? you can't compare these 2, you ask a question about functionality, then don't even mention a single thing about it. what you're mentioning here are effects of the culture, not examples of functionality. an example of functionality is that today 1 farmer can feed 20,000 people in one year. whereas in the past 1 farmer could feed 6 people, sometimes even less. so yes, we are more functional today. think out your question before you post it please:D

Answer 5

Yes
but they were infinitely smaller than our society.
And could not handle the complexities of ours.
All the problems like massacres, and suicides couldn't happen in a small tribal society because everybody knew each other and everybody was happy.
Cancer was just written off as dying from old age and mental disorders were usually just demons or something.

Answer 6

You are looking at a situation that is beyond you current ability to grasp. Don't worry about it for now. Just improve what is within your reach. The main problem that you are dealing with is false information and propaganda that the communists have been putting out. Avoid those who will tell you the sky is falling. Today it is global warming. Ten years ago it was the ozone. Twenty years ago it was acid rain. Before that it was global freezing. Study World War II and realize how evil people can become. Let me give you a clue to make sense of it: President Bush is correct in what he is doing. The media will destroy your country if you tune in to it.

Answer 7

Good question.
Man's technology (brain) is actually destroying us, right?
I read somwhere that there are things the scientists call radicals in the air we breathe.
That these radicals actually age us.
Can you imagine the very air we breathe is killing us slowly?
So maybe in primitive societies, their ignorance was bliss.