Iain Climie (New Scientist, Letters, 3/10/16) is right to emphasize the need for
population reductions in the resource-greedy developed countries. But
why does he think that we have difficulty "accepting our own entry in
the obituary column" when this is, as my Chemistry teacher remarked, the
only scientific law to which there are no known exceptions?
I don't believe that lust for immortality is the reason that we can't think clearly about population. In fact I see two reasons.
One reason is the 'zombie doctrine' that bigger is always better so a large population must be better than a smaller one. This doctrine helps to explain the political obsession with GDP - when GDP per head would make better sense (though measures of well-being would be better still.)
The
other is the sensitivity over appearing to tell people how many
children to have. But this is a mistake - a failure to distinguish
between a need for discussion and a desire to give orders. An odd
failure I think since most of the policies advocated to limit
population, eg easier access to birth control, actually increase human
freedom.
One reason is the 'zombie doctrine' that bigger is always better so a large population must be better than a smaller one. This doctrine helps to explain the political obsession with GDP - when GDP per head would make better sense (though measures of well-being would be better still.)
What do you mean by the lust of immortality and the increase in population, how can you relate both of these topics with each other. can you please define their relation
ReplyDelete