In many countries there is no change in these statistics.Burning ghost wrote: ↑September 11th, 2018, 6:15 amChild mortality down, educational access up, health care up, and nutrition up.ThomasHobbes wrote: ↑September 11th, 2018, 5:42 am
This is an interesting assumption, which if far from clear from the empirical information.
Of course these empirical facts don’t necessarily translate into “better” if you choose to define “better” in subjective terms and refer more to opportunity or sense of a lack of opportunity, “happiness” and such. Generally there is more of a chance for people today than before, but because there are more people - due to above points - there are more people in poverty in terms of head counting.
Then the issue is more about what % is deemed “better” when referring to human lives. It’s hardly something easy to determine in a unanimous way. I think someone pointed out this problem earlier in regards to 1000 in 1000000 compared to 10 in 100. We’re not really evolved with the equipment to deal with such numbers not to mention the added problem of emotional attachment to those nearest and dearest rather than some soul on the other side of the world in horrific conditions.
And it all depends on your time-scale.
Compared to 19thC urban living we are doing much better in the West. But go back before cities and you don't get the diseases at all.
Go and visit newly "civilised" tribes, and the incidence of heart disease and diabetes as a direct result of contact with so-called civilisation is a direct cause of these novel diseases.
Several countries still have life expectancy of 40.
Modern societies have more stress, more pollution, less natural environments.