Brad,

> I wanted to add my 2 cents on this subject.  I do not think that our
> ancestors had to "work harder" than we in the course of providing food and
> shelter.  In fact, in comparison, I believe that hunter-gatherers spent far
> less time in obtaining food, etc. than we do.

I keep hearing this but I have yet to see a good explanation for the fact
that our primitive HG ancestors had nothing to show for all this
hypothesized free time. Depending on when you start the clock, our primitive
Cro-Magnon ancestors and their ancestors had something like 2,000,000 years
to do something significant with all that free time. Two million years is a
very long time and they have almost nothing to show for it. Their neolithic
progeny accomplished more in 10 thousand years than they did in the 2
million prior!

Why did they never find time to invent written language? Why did they never
find time to invent complex musical intruments and write complex symphonies?
Why did they never find time to learn to build complex homes? Why did never
they find time to learn to paint beautiful masterpieces on canvas? In short,
why were primitive people so stuck on remaining PRIMITIVE?

Could it be that they were actually quite capable but that before the advent
of agriculture and animal husbandry people were just too blasted preoccupied
with the procurement of basic necessities to focus much attention on
exploring the higher levels of Maslow's hierarchy?

I promise I will scream if anyone here suggests or implies that primitive
people preferred to remain primitive because of some silly new-age
philosophy that caused them to believe it would better to live forever in
caves while subsisting on leaves and bugs and raw squirrel meat.

-gts