Yes, by far. However, there is a common misconception that hunter gatherer people understand environmental protection and work to conserve the environment. For example, early hunter gatherers are likely responsible for the extinction of paleolithic mega fauna. Hunter gather cultures are better for the environment because they are less intensive. Food is gathered, homes are simple transient structures, tools are rudimentary etc… The technology is simple and meets the needs of the population, and the population stays small because food is not highly available. Overall, the negative human created environmental impacts of hunter gatherer groups is almost non-existent when compared with the many destructive, wasteful, high energy technologies of modern civilization.
Hunting and gathering is certainly the most natural way to live. However, it limits population growth by the mechanism of causing people to starve during drought years. This is harsh on people’s emotions, and prevents the development of art, music and literature by disabled members of society who cannot contribute to the hunting and gathering processes because those people would be the first to die. I think that the best way for humanity to live is to have small farms and gardens close to where they live so that they are not burning up lots of fossil fuels by transporting food everywhere. Trade can help people learn new technologies to make life easier so that some members of society can develop arts and sciences. Science can help us keep our population low without placing undue stress on families through the loss of loved ones through diseases and famine.
If we went back to hunting and gathering without the aid of modern technology, we would sacrifice many things that our society holds dear such as romantic love and life-long friendships.
Click here to cancel reply.
Sorry,At this time user registration is disabled. We will open registration soon!
Don't have an account? Click Here to Signup
© Copyright GreenAnswers.com LLC