this isn't a particularly clear way to frame things -- there is likely some middle ground between "too many" and "too few" that is better than both of those ext

this isn't a particularly clear way to frame things -- there is likely some middle ground between "too many" and "too few" that is better than both of those extremes. i suspect human population could decline by 1 or 2 orders of magnitude without getting into "too few" territory, provided it was declining towards a steady state, not crashing uncontrollably