Discuss the negative and positive aspects of the development of agriculture. Was it, or was it not the worst mistake in the history of the human race?

The emergence of agriculture was a major stepping stone in human history. During this birth of agriculture, also known as the Neolithic revolution, humans began inhabiting permanent settlements, grow their own crops, and domesticate both plants and animals for food (Weisdorf, 2005). Considering humans have been hunter-gatherers for the majority of their approximately 7 million years of existence, the emergence of agriculture in the Old World only occurring 10,000-5,000 years ago, marks a significant transformation in food sustenance techniques (Weisdorf, 2005). However, this turning point in history is associated with both positive and negative implications. There is much controversy over whether or not the introduction of

Progressivists (those who believe in the benefits of agriculture) say that agriculture was more beneficial due to the fact that you could get more food for less work. The problem was that farming did not

He explains how farmers are highly susceptible to malnutrition, anemia, infectious diseases due to being crowded together, degenerative conditions due to hard physical labor, starvation, and sexual inequality due to women being released of their hunting duties and pressured to produce offspring to tend to the fields. Moreover, he supports his idea by explaining how hunter-gatherers have sufficient leisure time for painting and sculpting, sleep a good deal, work less hard than farmers, and have healthier diets due to the abundance of wild plants and animals available. The diet of hunter-gatherers contains high protein and well balance of proteins compared to farmers who can only consume one or a few foods from their

Diamond explains that our worst mistake was the transition from hunter-gathers to farmers. Diamond believes that humans were better off chasing our food rather than planting it due to the consequences that followed after such a dramatic change of life. His reasoning expands further out than one might think of about this subject. He talks about the social changes that were created when agriculture began. Diamond spews empowering points that leave a reader pondering if he is correct. People are only sure of how the world is now but the possibilities are endless on what our world could have been if agriculture had not begun.

Hunter- gatherers was able to consume many variety of foods, such as animals meat, berries, nuts, roots etc which are high in proteins and fiber. Farmers can only consume the crops they grew, which is limited. Additionally, the main commonly crops are rice, corn, and wheat, which is high in carbs and lacked fiber, vitamins, and proteins. As a result, farmers’ diet consists of carbs and fats, but no vitamins or proteins. The second risk is limited crop production. Farmers are easily opened to risk of starvation if their crops fail to grow. The final risk to agriculture is epidemic diseases. Agricultural encouraged farmers to get together in crowded societies in order to trade their crops, which can easily lead to spread of contagious diseases and

From the early prehistoric society until now, we often heard the word “adaptation”, which means the process of changing something or changing our behavior to deal with new situations. The ways people adjust their natural environment varies according to time, place, and tribe. Foraging is common way of adaptation that people uses for most of human history; however because of the population pressure, some people adopt agriculture to fulfill their need. This essay, will discuss the positive and negative aspects of life in hunting and gathering societies compared to the agricultural societies based on Martin Harris’ article “Murders in Eden” and Jared Diamond’s article “The Worst Mistake in the History of Human Race.”

With the climate change it allowed most animals and plants to survive. Now people didn’t have to go seek for food it came to them.

The ability to produce more crops required a method to transport them to more people. This method was for people to clump closer together, which facilitated the spread of disease amongst communities. People migrated nearer to each other because they could receive a frequent supply of food. “The mere fact that agriculture encouraged people to clump together in crowded societies, many of which then carried on trade with other crowded societies, led to the spread of parasites and infectious disease” (65). Diamond argues that because agriculture brought people together in close proximity disease and parasites were able to spread more rapidly and frequently. Hunters and gatherers tended to spread out and keep to themselves. This ultimately eliminated the possibility of an epidemic sweeping through societies. For instance, “epidemics couldn’t take hold when populations were scattered in small bands that constantly shifted camp” (65). Among hunter-gatherer

b. Environment change and global warming caused the human population to experience a rapid growth. As more gatherers and hunters occupied the earth, more animals were being hunted. As a result of this, many megafaunal animals became extinct so the gatherers and hunters had to adjust their food supply. From the need of food came the discovery of agriculture. For the Iroquois, they built their villages around maize fields. The women would tend the crops and overlook the community, while the men would hunt.

When humans turned to agriculture, they had to depend on the weather for crop production and a good harvest, which did not always turn out to their favour. Neolithic farmers faced drought,

One of the greatest revolutions in the history of homo sapiens was the adoption of agriculture, which changed the face of communities at every level of class. Though this change was built upon new ideas and allowed us to provide more food for more people, was it in fact a positive change at the time? Today in 2017, we can all look around and see where the agricultural revolution has gotten us in the long run, but authors such as Yuval Noah Harari (2011) claim that during the infancy of the agricultural revolution, life for the average citizen was often a worse one than that of the common forager. A change in food production created many other changes, such as permanent human settlement, biologically unconventional labor, and a larger population density. This paper explores the pros and cons of the agricultural society and the hunter-gatherer society

First, I would like to discuss the strategy of hunting and gathering, the sole strategy until twelve thousand years ago. Hunting and gathering is a form of subsistence dependent upon wild plants and animals for the majority of the calories of the diet. While its name underscores the importance of hunting in this lifestyle, this is misleading as the majority of caloric needs in societies practicing this strategy are met by gathering wild edible plants and berries.

The ability of humanity to adapt to agriculture, new climates is evidence to many that climate change poses fundamental threat to agriculture that clever humans, as in centuries past, will simply adapt agriculture

The revolutionizing transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture was a central shift in the way homo sapiens lived that occurred twelve thousand years ago. Consequently, several factors contributed to this astonishing modification of life including increasing population size, favorable environments such as the Nile River in Egypt and the Fertile Crescent in the Mediterranean. Furthermore, the transition from hunting and gathering to agriculture allowed for mass production of food in order for the sustainability of the increasing population size, but with agriculture also came specialization and the division of labor ultimately leading to moral inequality.

Agriculture was the most important economic activity in America from the founding of Virginia in 1607 to about 1890. Although farming declined rapidly in relative economic importance in the twentieth century, U.S. agriculture continued to be the most efficient and productive in the world. Its success rested on abundant fertile soil, a moderate climate, the ease of private land ownership, growing markets for farm produce at home and abroad, and the application of science and technology to farm operations.