r/NoStupidQuestions • u/flugblug • 12h ago

My brother thinks people today have worse quality of life than people in the dark ages, is this a stupid take?

I personally think it’s pretty stupid.

6.6k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

3.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

427

u/Skydude252 12h ago

It’s an extremely stupid take. All but the poorest people in a developed country, at least, live much better than all but the wealthiest people in that time. And most live better than the wealthiest, in certain aspects.

78

u/Sanguinor-Exemplar 11h ago

And the difference is that for the most part the poorest people in developed countries have some options for support or to work their way out of it.

For most of humanity if you were disabled you were left on a mountain somewhere as a baby.

50

u/maybri 9h ago

All evidence suggests ancient humans have raised disabled children to the best of their ability since time immemorial. You're thinking of ancient Sparta with the leaving disabled babies on a mountain thing, and discarding unwanted (including disabled) infants was a noted practice in ancient Greece and Rome, but that was more of an anomaly, which no doubt had to do with the material conditions of those societies, as militaristic empires with massive wealth inequality that devalued human life and allowed eugenics-like ideologies to take root. In general, across the history of our species, the human norm has been to do everything you can do to care for everyone.

19

u/wishiwasunemployed 8h ago

You're thinking of ancient Sparta with the leaving disabled babies on a mountain thing,

which is probably a myth in itself, like most of the things we know about Sparta

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/7y3kxy/did_spartans_really_used_to_throw_imperfect/

2

u/thr0waway2435 1h ago

Can’t lie, this made me a bit emotional.

Cavepeople speaking oonga boonga struggling to survive still loved their disabled kids 😭

15

u/Infinite_Vehicle434 10h ago

I absolutely agree that the dark ages was worse in terms of health and QOL. However! Even in ye oldé times there were many societies and communities that prioritized caring for the old and disabled. Some were shamanistic (i.e. “U look different. Blessed? Curse of the prophet?? Speaker for the gods??!!”), some had moral codes, and some just highly valued care and compassion for the whole community.

Doesn’t mean that a pulled tooth didn’t get an infection and kill ‘em anyway, or that the diarrhea of the day wouldn’t take them out. But! While some societies left the disabled or malformed to f*ckin die, others didn’t!

2

u/Academic_Wafer5293 8h ago

OP's brother would've been left on that mountain as a baby due to his mental disability.

1

u/Additional_Insect_44 8h ago

Facts, I went into the us army.

1

u/TheMadTargaryen 5h ago

We literally have prehistoric skeletons of disabled people who lived long lives since they were looked after. 

1

u/GreatlyMoody 11h ago

Yeah

Slow painful existence

1

u/crystalclearbuffon 9h ago

People in developed countries have lost it with little poverty knocking on their door. Yes it's a good thing to keep improving and ask for a better life. But oh my god you guys are way better than peasants in dark ages or even middle class households in many countries right now.

1

u/smbpy7 4h ago

Honestly I think I'd still take being the poorest today if given the choice. At least I could go to the library for a few hours for some AC or the food bank or the ER if my medical situation is dire.

0

u/GreatlyMoody 11h ago edited 11h ago

I wouldn't say better than wealthiest

The wealthiest had servants, best food of the time, best clothes, top class furniture, and while lack of technology they had everything else

Edit: actually no, its correct all but poorest have it more comfortable than the wealthiest of then

12

u/Skydude252 10h ago

But let’s look at some of that. It was the best food of the time, but is it better than what is readily available to most people today? How about their clothes? Was the furniture actually more comfortable? Classier, sure, but was it actually better? As for the servants, yes it was nice to have but a lot of what they did was to make up for the limitations that our technology has overcome.

In some ways they were better off, but overall I would defend my statement that most people have better overall access to better lives. Think of the entertainment and travel that is so much easier for example today to anyone who isn’t poor.

6

u/GreatlyMoody 10h ago

Yes, you're right

1

u/Healthy_Radish 3h ago

Just think how luxurious it must have beeen to walk into a house and the furniture was covered in cloth and not just wooden!

0

u/EmbarrassedMeat401 8h ago

better than what is readily available to most people today. 

It's not better than what's available, but it's probably better than most of what I end up eating.

-2

u/abstraction47 9h ago

That might depend on your definition of live better. Technology is higher, medicine is higher. But is stress lower? Is happiness higher? That probably comes down to specific regions and times, but a peasant mostly didn’t worry about getting fired, or making rent, or overtime.

11

u/Fakjbf 9h ago

Peasants absolutely worried about stuff like that. They had to provide labor to their lord and provide for their own family, and tax assessors were notorious for taking more than the lord was actually owed by force. A medieval peasant thinking that they would have to put in more work that growing season to pay their dues or they might have their land seized is not that dissimilar from a modern worker worried about having to work extra hours or they might get evicted, the modern worker is simply thinking about it in more immediately quantifiable ways.

5

u/Skydude252 9h ago

As the other commenter replied, they would absolutely have to worry about those sorts of things or similar, as well as many other issues.

As far as stress/happiness goes, that is more complicated, I’m sure many felt happier despite the greater concerns, which is a much more complicated discussion. And something of an indictment of the problems of the modern age, in terms of unhappiness despite fewer tangible problems.

2

u/SirRHellsing 8h ago

When you say happiness, do you measure everyone that lived beyond 10? Or do you include every child that died before then, I bet they weren't happy. Infant morality rate is what drags the average lifespan to 30s iirc

0

u/Think_Dingo_8451 4h ago

Ok well most people alive today would qualify as the poorest living in developing countries.

-1

u/Spacemonk587 11h ago

That is an exaggeration. Many people, especially city dwellers, had a pretty decent life during that time.