4 ms·

Malthus was wrong in the 1820s, and he was still wrong in the 1970s. Maybe someday, he'll turn out to have been "right" after all, but I'm not going to hold my

Malthus was wrong in the 1820s, and he was still wrong in the 1970s. Maybe someday, he'll turn out to have been "right" after all, but I'm not going to hold my breath. It's kind of amazing that, 150 years after Malthus, the same recycled arguments were still made and given serious consideration. Then again, 50 years hence and the "cult of Malthus" still seems alive and well and larger than ever. And still wrong.

quantified 5y ago
Math suggests a limit somewhere, we just don’t know where it is, or how plausible various step changes in the limiting factors will be. Probably war will thin things out at some point, I just hope not nuclear so the land and water remain relatively useable.
- codefreeordie 5y ago
  Everything has a limit, sure. If nothing else, the population of humans on earth will probably stop growing before we reach the point where there is a continuous layer of humanity covering the surface of the earth. Malthus's (and these others') mistake is not in assuming that there are limits to population growth without a change in how things are done, it is in assuming that we have already had all of the good ideas we'll ever have. It's not just Malthus and folks from the 70s, either. In the 1890s, authors wrote about how every street in London / New York City would be buried under 8-10 feet of horse manure if populations continued to grow. They did, and there's less horse dung now in either city than there was in 1894. On the one hand, you can't fault people for not knowing specifically that we'd invent the automobile, but on the other hand, if you want to make predictions about the future, you need to account for humanity's ability to solve problems and invent new things. It is interesting, though, that pretty consistently since Malthus wrote in 1826, "the end of the world" has always been about 15 years away.
  - quantified 5y ago
    I wonder if that 15 years away has anything to do with perception of time by people of a certain age range. Wrt people changing what they do- yup. Given the way we soil the environment, I won’t be surprised that a few things will catch us, and also something that wasn’t foreseen in 1970. People who are frothing about lower testosterone levels and sperm counts are not frothing about chemistry that performs these lowerings, for example.
    - codefreeordie 5y ago
      I tend to think that we end up with "about 15 years" because it is long enough that nobody can really gainsay you with confidence, but short enough to be scary. If I tried to start a panic about how [bad thing] would happen in 40 or 50 years, roughly half the population would see that as "long after I'm dead and buried anyway". If I tried to start a panic about how [bad thing] would happen in 3 or 4 years, people would remember my claims when the [bad thing] didn't happen, and my career as a wielder of influence would be over.

quantified 5y ago

Math suggests a limit somewhere, we just don’t know where it is, or how plausible various step changes in the limiting factors will be. Probably war will thin things out at some point, I just hope not nuclear so the land and water remain relatively useable.

codefreeordie 5y ago
Everything has a limit, sure. If nothing else, the population of humans on earth will probably stop growing before we reach the point where there is a continuous layer of humanity covering the surface of the earth. Malthus's (and these others') mistake is not in assuming that there are limits to population growth without a change in how things are done, it is in assuming that we have already had all of the good ideas we'll ever have. It's not just Malthus and folks from the 70s, either. In the 1890s, authors wrote about how every street in London / New York City would be buried under 8-10 feet of horse manure if populations continued to grow. They did, and there's less horse dung now in either city than there was in 1894. On the one hand, you can't fault people for not knowing specifically that we'd invent the automobile, but on the other hand, if you want to make predictions about the future, you need to account for humanity's ability to solve problems and invent new things. It is interesting, though, that pretty consistently since Malthus wrote in 1826, "the end of the world" has always been about 15 years away.
- quantified 5y ago
  I wonder if that 15 years away has anything to do with perception of time by people of a certain age range. Wrt people changing what they do- yup. Given the way we soil the environment, I won’t be surprised that a few things will catch us, and also something that wasn’t foreseen in 1970. People who are frothing about lower testosterone levels and sperm counts are not frothing about chemistry that performs these lowerings, for example.
  - codefreeordie 5y ago
    I tend to think that we end up with "about 15 years" because it is long enough that nobody can really gainsay you with confidence, but short enough to be scary. If I tried to start a panic about how [bad thing] would happen in 40 or 50 years, roughly half the population would see that as "long after I'm dead and buried anyway". If I tried to start a panic about how [bad thing] would happen in 3 or 4 years, people would remember my claims when the [bad thing] didn't happen, and my career as a wielder of influence would be over.