I think that the best way to describe this would be to think of ALL of the negative connotations that develop on people who don’t adapt to new technology, and place them all in a giant heap in front of anyone who would not adapt to some of the most basic technology that we have, technology that means the difference between life or death.
Like, think of how much we make fun of people that don’t want to use computers, cell phones, or cars. Think of how we feel about people who don’t know how to read despite going to school. Think of Amish jokes. 🤣
Now… Place all of that on someone who doesn’t use clothes, fire, basic shelter, clean water, or sharp objects (knives for cooking).
In prehistoric river-based cultures and civilizations (Egypt, Mesopotamia, China, Indus, etc) where people were figuring out new ways to do some of the most basic things we now take for granted, imagine how dumb and backwards they considered “barbarians” (rural people) who couldn’t read or didn’t wear enough clothes. In ancient China, 4,000 years ago, the definition of a civilized man was that he knew how to cook his meat and grains. I learned that when I was studying the Han people ethnic definition (more specifically, where the practice of refusing to eat grains came from. It was an ancient Chinese hippy “back to nature”movement.)
Imagine how much we make fun of men who don’t know how to cook now, and then imagine how much disdain ancient people had for people who didn’t know how to do these things back when there weren’t any grocery stores, so your ignorance wasn’t just “weaponized laziness” it was considered outright failure to be a homo sapien.
This is how a technology goes from being optional but beneficial to absolutely necessary and you’re a fool if you don’t do it, and you may even be mentally unstable. Imagine watching someone try to cut steak but refusing to use anything sharpened. Imagine someone drinking muddy water and saying they’ll be okay, because… I dunno, their god blessed it. 🤣
Latest Answers