Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Selfish reasons to want more humans

rootsofprogress.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 480 posts

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#301

Post by hilbert42 »

dash2 wrote: post #244
hilbert42 wrote: post #127

"One argument for a larger population is based on utilitarianism, specifically the version of it that says that what is good is the sum total of happiness across all humans." Utilitarianism doesn't say that 'good is the sum total of happiness across all humans' but rather it says it's 'the greatest good for the greatest number', which is substantially different, so this is a distortion of the facts. I would refer the…

> Utilitarianism doesn't say that 'good is the sum total of happiness across all humans' but rather it says it's 'the greatest good for the greatest number', which is substantially different, so this is a distortion of the facts. I would refer the author to the works of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill especially his work Utilitarianism. That's why the author mentions "specifically the version" of utilitarianism w…

Put two philosophers in a room and have them discuss utilitarianism and you'll end up with twenty opinions. Average utilitarianism is just one of its later fallouts. (I needn't tell you how unpopular utilitarianism is with many philosophers and others—especially in this era).

Fact is, the author used the splinter view to further his argument which hasn't worked. Given other weaknesses he would have been better to ignore utilitarianism altogether.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#302

Post by matthewdgreen »

AstralStorm wrote: post #146
abdullahkhalids wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The OP also claims that growth is possible indefinitely. But somehow, we need more humans to to have critical resources necessary to execute some projects. The contradiction is lost on the OP author.

This is true only to some degree, there are always limits to growth. These limits are actually very far away, most of the trouble is caused by the funny rationing/commons depletion system we call capitalism. The predicted 10-12 billion humans should have more than enough everything. We don't because capital and access are rationed.

We’re at 8 billion people. Obtain 3% annual population growth and continue for 20 years you’re already at 14 billion. 30 years you get to 19 billion. If those numbers don’t seem like they’re within the limits to growth as you see them, keep adding decades and soon you’ll reach a number that probably is. The point here being that the limits may be far away numerically, but at modest growth rates we will hit any conceivable one. We are going to have to adapt to stable or declining population rates at some point, and this seems like a particularly good time to do it.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#304

Post by dotancohen »

pseudocomposer wrote: post #262
synecdoche wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about providing concrete methods for reducing population? Exactly how do you propose to reduce population and who should be forced to not have children first? Should we assume that you will lead by example?

Why should anyone be forced not to have kids? We could all have one and the population would halve in a generation.

I have three children, not unusual for my culture. My community's gardener has 14 children, low for his culture but he's still young. He's only on his second wife and he just passed 40 years old.

Are you going to tell him that he needs to change his culture? Arguably he could have a lot to say about our culture spewing out hydrocarbons being damaging to the planet, which would be justified far before we criticise his reproduction.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#305

Post by dotancohen »

nerdponx wrote: post #240
silvestrov wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If "more people" was always better then India and Africa should be much richer than Europe. A lack of people can be an innovation driver: "hiring people is too expensive, so we have to automate everything", i.e. innovation is a must for survival.

Also if people are starving or otherwise suffering, they probably aren't innovating. We already have plenty of people. We have a lack of people with the means to live comfortably and invent stuff.

Is not necessity the mother of invention?

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#306

Post by jmyeet »

I don't want more humans per se. I want more humans to have access to a life of dignity where their basic needs are met and there's absolutely no reason why every human currently on Earth can't have that. The only reason they don't is we choose to withold it from them.

Why? Capitalism. So a tiny few people can hoard even more wealth. Also, much of the talk around more people is strictly self-serving: to preserve and create even more concentrated wealth (by creating more humans to exploit) and the preservation of power structures by maintaining certain ethnic majorities.

In much of the world we have what I've seen called a "hopelessness crisis" and it goes well beyond people not having children because they simply can't afford to. Many people now believe they'll never have security so what's the point in doing anything? Particularly anything long-term. Why should someone who struggles to have enough to eat and put a roof over their head care about, say, the long-term risks of climate change? Particularly when we, as a society, have chosen to deny that person housing and food security. As a planet, we produce enough food to feed everyone and enough wealth to provide shelter for everyone.

Now this also touches on how many people the Earth could support. Many argue the Earth is overcrowded. That's simply not true. We're not far from the point where quite literally trillions of people could be supported comfortably on Earth.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#307

Post by matwood »

strangattractor wrote: post #103
defrost wrote: post #22

More ambitious projects need a certain critical mass of resources behind them. Ancient Egyptian civilization built a large irrigation system to make the best use of the Nile floodwaters for agriculture, a feat that would not have been possible to a small tribe or chiefdom. This doesn't mean people, we're no longer bound by labour intensive solutions. I live in a single state with a tiny population that mines and ship…

The 2 most prominent proponents of this idea happen to have the resources (money) that will allow them to avoid most of the downsides a larger population would create. Great for them bad for me. There are plenty enough geniuses in existence today. They cannot be utilized because they live in shitty conditions created by the too large population we already have. As others have pointed out consideration of of negative…

> They cannot be utilized because they live in shitty conditions created by the too large population we already have.

Or they just live in a shitty place under some autocratic/dictator/religious rule. I'm not sure that has much to do with the population size.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#308

Post by huytersd »

Jensson wrote: post #126
healsdata wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The combined population of those countries is 2.8 billion. For your assertion to be true, 71% of those countries would have had to have been in poverty in the recent past and now are not.

You got about a billion in China, they were at the bottom end of the country gdp per capita rankings, now they are well into the upper half. The commenter probably assumed India did a similar journey, but India is still full of poverty and not even close to China, so yeah probably less than two billions combined but definitely more than a billion.

I mean India went from 11th to 5th largest economy in the span of a decade and it continues to grow consistently at around 7%. It has pulled 400 million people out of poverty in the last 10 years so it is a part of the story.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#309

Post by vinceguidry »

Sammi wrote: post #296
vinceguidry wrote: post #289

It's not a new argument, and is also one used to justify anti-abortion policies, bans on contraception and the like. Wasn't just the religious folks.

Don't arguments have context? Doesn't the conclusion of an argument depend on the context?

Yes, and I was adding context.

Policy positions get all kinds of promoters for all kinds of different reasons. A position can and should be rejected purely on the basis that the 'wrong' kinds of people support it. It can be considered again when the right kinds of people start supporting it. This is how you don't put total rank assholes in power, and also how enormous assholes game the system to get in power.

If you own a bar and a group of neo-Nazis come in, you have to throw them out. If you don't throw them out, then they will turn your normal bar into a neo-Nazi hangout. Neutrality isn't an option when violence is a possible result.

Re: Selfish reasons to want more humans

#310

Post by michaelt »

synecdoche wrote: post #216
strangattractor wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 2 most prominent proponents of this idea happen to have the resources (money) that will allow them to avoid most of the downsides a larger population would create. Great for them bad for me. There are plenty enough geniuses in existence today. They cannot be utilized because they live in shitty conditions created by the too large population we already have. As others have pointed out consideration of of negative…

How about providing concrete methods for reducing population? Exactly how do you propose to reduce population and who should be forced to not have children first? Should we assume that you will lead by example?

Rich countries have sub-replacement rates of fertility already.

All we have to do is embrace it.

Post reply on HN