Jean and Gerhard Lenski, in their theory of sociocultural evolution, describe five different types of societies, separated by their technologies. They are the hunting and gathering societies, the horticultural and pastoral societies, the agrarian societies, the industrial societies, and the post-industrial societies. Which of these societies would I prefer? I will argue that the post-industrial society is favorable to the other four societies.
             Compared to the post-industrial society, an individual in the hunting and gathering society consumes a great deal of time, energy, and thought, collecting and hunting for food. Most of these societies today generally live in marginal areas where resources are scarce, so life for the hunter and gatherer seems more oriented toward mere survival. The natural elements can be harsh, for example, in the Arctic where the Inuit live. In the post-industrial society, food is easily available, allowing more time to focus on other interests. Life expectancy is also very low compared to post-industrial societies. Technology is minimal in the hunting and gathering society, which again relates back to the need for expending time and energy finding food. Technology in medicine is also primitive for hunters and gatherers. If I, or someone I cared for, develops appendicitis, for example, this would be easily treatable in the post-industrial society, death would be rare. In the hunting and gathering society, likely I or my cared-one would suffer pain and eventually die.
             The hunting and gathering society certainly has its benefits. Equality is great and social stratification is low, as opposed to the post-industrial society. I feel that the costs, however, outweigh these benefits. As with the hunting and gathering societies, the horticultural and pastoral societies do not afford as much time for leisure as does the post-industrial society. Production of food in the horticulturist society and care of animal...