02-25-2008, 11:07 PM
In the course of several discussions and reading a bit on the internet, I encounter a school of thought which says how we - humans in general - are so better off than our ancestors. We have better medical facilities, we have matured economic/business cycles that we can take advantage of to make money, we have better schooling, education, transport etc.
There is a lots of truth in that school of thought. With better living standards, we live longer, with free time given by gadgets and machines we are able to spend more time doing things that enthrall and engage us, more time with the family, more time with sports, lots of way to monitor and tune our health. For that matter internet is a new medium for communication and we have access to material that was not easily accessible before.
But, is there a balance in life? This probably is a quintessential question man has been posing right from the day he started to civilize. Are we better off than our ancestors? Are we paying any price for the development?
There is a lots of truth in that school of thought. With better living standards, we live longer, with free time given by gadgets and machines we are able to spend more time doing things that enthrall and engage us, more time with the family, more time with sports, lots of way to monitor and tune our health. For that matter internet is a new medium for communication and we have access to material that was not easily accessible before.
But, is there a balance in life? This probably is a quintessential question man has been posing right from the day he started to civilize. Are we better off than our ancestors? Are we paying any price for the development?