3 ms·

> The solution in a nutshell? A man (or all humans) have got to know their limits. But if you look at animal or plant (or bacteria) species, they absolutely do

by waps 12y ago

> The solution in a nutshell? A man (or all humans) have got to know their limits. But if you look at animal or plant (or bacteria) species, they absolutely don't do this. They just grow to whatever the current capacity of the world is (meaning they would immediately choose the "low sustainability option you present). This is despite the fact that most non-human species are most definitely living in a world that is being filled close to capacity. So the argument to this solution is that it's not possible. It's not a Nash equilibrium and any set of humans that picks an option like that will simply die through natural selection, and this will not result in increased sustainability at all.

dredmorbius 12y ago
I pretty much agree with your overall view. There are very few examples of species which consciously self-limit. Humans are distinctive for a number of reasons, including that we've got the ability to model complex relationships and project forward into the future. Jared Diamond's Collapse looks at a number of civilizations which have fairly effectively managed to live within their means, though they do so by adopting moralities which are quite extreme, and generally unacceptable, to Western views, including infanticide and ritual suicide. Most of those cultures are also fairly small. Playing out this game on a global scope, where communications can circle the world in under a second, people in under a day, and massive quantities of goods in a few weeks (via ship), is a rather different game. If you're interested in more, look up David Korowicz, Joseph Tainter, or for a real blast of optimism, Olduvai Theory. Korowicz in particular looks at issues of global supply chain contagion and what that might have to offer by way of negative dynamics. My point of "knowing limits" isn't that that knowledge be expressed consciously. But it will be established. http://energyskeptic.com/2014/david-korowicz-2013-catastrophic-shocks-through-complex-socio-economic-systems/ http://energyskeptic.com/2014/david-korowicz-2013-catastroph... http://www.powells.com/biblio/9780521386739 http://www.powells.com/biblio/9780521386739 http://dieoff.org/page125.htm http://dieoff.org/page125.htm

by waps 12y ago

dredmorbius 12y ago

I pretty much agree with your overall view. There are very few examples of species which consciously self-limit. Humans are distinctive for a number of reasons, including that we've got the ability to model complex relationships and project forward into the future. Jared Diamond's Collapse looks at a number of civilizations which have fairly effectively managed to live within their means, though they do so by adopting moralities which are quite extreme, and generally unacceptable, to Western views, including infanticide and ritual suicide. Most of those cultures are also fairly small. Playing out this game on a global scope, where communications can circle the world in under a second, people in under a day, and massive quantities of goods in a few weeks (via ship), is a rather different game. If you're interested in more, look up David Korowicz, Joseph Tainter, or for a real blast of optimism, Olduvai Theory. Korowicz in particular looks at issues of global supply chain contagion and what that might have to offer by way of negative dynamics. My point of "knowing limits" isn't that that knowledge be expressed consciously. But it will be established. http://energyskeptic.com/2014/david-korowicz-2013-catastrophic-shocks-through-complex-socio-economic-systems/ http://energyskeptic.com/2014/david-korowicz-2013-catastroph... http://www.powells.com/biblio/9780521386739 http://www.powells.com/biblio/9780521386739 http://dieoff.org/page125.htm http://dieoff.org/page125.htm