posted on May, 22 2013 @ 02:34 PM
So.... nobody sees a huge issue with this study?
Their comparison was off. They are comparing the upper classes of the victorian era to the workers of today. It would be like comparing the best, most
impressive roman soldier to a mediocre modern national guardsmen (not saying the national guard is mediocre, just this specific soldier) and then
concluding that the roman army was far more powerful than our modern day army simply because we compared to the high end of one generation to the low
end of another.
In addition to that, there is the issue of changing requirements for success To be successful in the modern world you must have different skills and
strengths than people at that time did. Did anyone back then write computer code? No? That doesn't mean they are more stupid, just that they didn't
have that as an option or a need. Just like comparing intelligence between two very different TIMES is nearly impossible to do. They would likely have
a very hard time doing anything in today's world. They couldn't use computers, drive, do most of the things that the common man does without
thinking about it, would be a struggle for them.
I tend to think we would do better going back, it may be frustrating to deal with the lack of some comforts, but most alll of us could still read,
write, do math, know a bit of history, etc etc. A modern day laborer could likely go back to that time and get a job as a laborer there. A laborer
from that time could NOT come into the future and compete with modern laborers, as unskilled labor today isn't unskilled at all in many ways.