Talk:554 - Homo Miserabilis (From Primitive Affluence to Developed Poverty)

Free time and quality of life in hunter gatherer v. industrial, modern US-style society. -- RandomonHigh 22:15, 13 June 2011 (PDT)

I was speaking to a friend of hunter/gatherers' affluence as defined by the amount of leisure time (=freedom?) available to them and the plentifulness of food generally available to them (Marshall Sahlins reading). My friend responded by asking, "sure, but what is their average life span?". It brings up a good point, what is or was their average, or better yet, median life span? If my friend is right and people living that way of life do live shorter lives, it brings up an interesting question that I think I'll end up asking people when in a mode of thoughtful conversation: "If given the choice of living a hunter/gatherer lifestyle and living only until, say 65 years of age, or living in modern society, but being able to live until, say 100 years old, presuming a retirement age of 65 years old (and that you actually have a retirement/pension to carry you through), which would you prefer? After stating that I'd rather live a shorter, hunter/gatherer lifestyle, my friend responded that he was friends with a 90 year old who had worked most of his life, far past 65, and was the happiest person he knew. It is a good counter-point that I find helps better develop the argument (in its meaning as a "search for truth")for considering alternative lifestyles as viable.

Re: Free time and quality of life in hunter gatherer v. industrial, modern US-style society. -- Aurora 13:25, 14 June 2011 (PDT)

That is a good point, RandomHigh. A hint towards the solution to that problem may be that that elder person has worked obviously in a job that he liked and that he worked in voluntarily even after retirement. that is not the case for most people. Also he seems to be in good health, another thing many people especially in less paid jobs do not have. The fact is, that in modern society, the number of people with that level of happiness is not so high compared to those who basically work only so they get money for the two weeks of vacation a year. I hold it possible that in a more ideal society that would allow people do only do jobs they like, provide adequate pensions and provide pensionists a sense of being worth something as well as caring for health impacts of too much work - it may actually be worth living in it. This is not the reality however and modern lifestyle and industrialism in my opinion requires a system of work and distribution of work as it is now or similar to that. And under that circumstances I would (given I would be young enough to reap the benefits of it) also rather choose a shorter but more healthy and happy life.

Difficulty of Length of Life and Measuring Poverty -- Robin 8:15, 16 June 2001 (BDT)

Maybe living in Bangladesh (often cited as a 'poor' or 'needy' country) has made me sceptical of claims to measure poverty objectively. It feels very different here - less attention to goods and more to family and friends may well make for an experience which is objectively poorer and simultaneously subjectively richer. See #556 for the remainder of the Ivan Illich reading on this. As for measuring life in years, my experience of old age homes in UK has suggested to me that these do not represent real progress, even if they may extend lifespan (itself uncertain). FWIW, even disregarding catastrophic scenarios, I think human lifespan may have peaked, as the accumulated chemical/radiological pollution comes home to roost.

There is no chance of all of us suddenly heading off for the Kalahari to live as hunter gatherers, so I hope this episode helps us address the mental change needed to address the coming changes, when people en masse find out that there is no pension plan for them, no Walmart in which to spend it, not much in the way of mass produced stuff from China etc.

Re: Difficulty of Length of Life and Measuring Poverty -- RandomonHigh 21:25, 15 June 2011 (PDT)

I have no doubt that for me the point is definitely a conscious move towards desiring (I almost wrote "needing") less. Here on the Pacific Coast of Oregon in the US, we live in a very forested, rural place and there are many opportunities to hunt and gather and many people supplement their diets by doing so. I have found that it re-establishes and enriches my relationship with the other beings in nature that we share this life with.

There are certainly those who are so conditioned by the consumer lifestyle that the coming crisis may very well rip their psyches apart once ignorance becomes impossible, but there are also many who consciously or intuitively realize that the change is not only inevitable, but appropriate. I have found that many of these people aren't opposed to simplifying and reducing their consumption of luxury items, but are very biased against or scared of such scenarios as not having the money to take their child or themselves to the doctor if they need medical attention. I would be curious to find out more on medicine in a localized society that incorporates many of the ideals expounded upon or implied in UG. Maybe a future topic? Hmmm. Thanks Aurora and Robin for contributing!