sacred buffalo breath
Pennsylvania

Join sacred buffalo breath on tribe.net today!

sacred buffalo breath has invited you to join him at Tribe.net.

Escaping the Malthusian Trap

topic posted Tue, May 9, 2006 - 11:33 AM by 
Share/Save/Bookmark
Advertisement
Principle of population (from wikipedia)

Malthus's views were largely developed in reaction to the optimistic views of his father and his associates, notably Rousseau and William Godwin. In An Essay on the Principle of Population, first published in 1798, Malthus made the famous prediction that population would outrun food supply, leading to a decrease in food per person. (Case & Fair, 1999: 790).

"The power of population is so superior to the power of the earth to produce subsistence for man, that premature death must in some shape or other visit the human race. The vices of mankind are active and able ministers of depopulation. They are the precursors in the great army of destruction; and often finish the dreadful work themselves. But should they fail in this war of extermination, sickly seasons, epidemics, pestilence, and plague, advance in terrific array, and sweep off their thousands and tens of thousands. Should success be still incomplete, gigantic inevitable famine stalks in the rear, and with one mighty blow levels the population with the food of the world."

This Principle of Population was based on the idea that population if unchecked increases at a geometric rate (i.e. 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, etc.) whereas the food supply grows at an arithmetic rate (i.e. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, etc.).

Only natural causes (eg. accidents and old age), misery (war, pestilence, and above all famine), moral restraint and vice (which for Malthus included infanticide, murder, contraception and homosexuality) could check excessive population growth. See Malthusian catastrophe for more information.

Malthus favoured moral restraint (including late marriage and sexual abstinence) as a check on population growth. However, it is worth noting that Malthus proposed this only for the working and poor classes. Thus, the lower social classes took a great deal of responsibility for societal ills, according to his theory. Essentially what this resulted in was the promotion of legislation which some claim degenerated the conditions of the poor in England, but may have discouraged increases in poverty.

Malthus himself noted that many people misrepresented his theory, and took pains to point out that he did not just predict future catastrophe. He argued "...this constantly subsisting cause of periodical misery has existed ever since we have had any histories of mankind, does exist at present, and will for ever continue to exist, unless some decided change takes place in the physical constitution of our nature."

Thus, Malthus regarded his Principle of Population as an explanation of the past and the present situation of humanity, as well as a prediction of our future.

Additionally, many have argued that Malthus did not recognise the human capacity to increase our food supply. On this subject Malthus wrote "The main peculiarity which distinguishes man from other animals, is the means of his support, is the power which he possesses of very greatly increasing these means."

(full article @ link below)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Malthus
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malt...atastrophe

---------
On October 12, 1999, United Nations demographers lamented the symbolic birth of planet Earth’s six-billionth resident. The world’s population had doubled from three billion in less than 50 years. And, though the rate of growth is slowing, population is projected to reach nine billion in another 50 years (Population Division, 1999). Many planners express the traditional Malthusian fears that the earth’s ability to feed, clothe, and provide other necessities of life for humanity’s growing numbers will soon be surpassed...

(full article @ link below)
www.cei.org/gencon/019,03109.cfm
posted by:
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • This post was deleted by Wanderingangel
  • Fertility and the Malthusian Trap

    Fri, May 12, 2006 - 6:41 PM
    Unfortunately, the normal fluctuation of fertility is rarely accounted for when projecting future global populations. Most projections presume certain factors to be constant and also often include factors that seems to have potential to effect the growth of population. The rise and fall of civilizations can be tracked by fertility rates. There exists a cycle for all life (plants and animals) on this planet a pattern in reaction to solar cycles that stem from cycles of the Galactic Center. At this time the stage of the cycle is at the relative beginning of low fertility period. The periods of high and low fertility have lasted somewhere between 100 and 300 years.

    At this time many of the departments of the UN are recalculating the projection tables they have been used, because current data on population growth does not match the projections of the current tables that have been used for the last twenty years.
  • Unsu...
     

    Re: Escaping the Malthusian Trap

    Sun, May 14, 2006 - 10:37 PM
    Yeah, that sounds about right....

    In layman's terms - pretty soon, it's gonna get crowded; so you best be somewhat prepared to grow your own food...
    *PREPARE FOR SELF-SUFFICIENCY* folks - and teach your kids how to do it, and how to *defend* themselves... (not become bullies - bullies will have a very short life expectancy - those who cooperate and communicate well will survive... Everyone else is going to get "a little grumpy")
  • Re: Escaping the Malthusian Trap

    Wed, July 5, 2006 - 9:51 AM
    does this model assume that human history, indeed the history of all organisms, has been a constant trail of starved corpses? i'm no ecologist, but when i look through my amateur eyes into natural habitats, things seem to be working like a well-oiled machine - and this view has been pretty common through history, to the degree that the well-functioning of the natural world has repeatedly been given as evidence of intelligent design. it's true that human civilization, e.g. human history for the last 3000 years, has been an unending nightmare of ineptitude and misery, but i'm not sure that you can extrapolate from this one failure a natural law - i think this is a problem particular to this form of civilization.
    • Re: Escaping the Malthusian Trap

      Thu, July 6, 2006 - 8:44 AM
      Civilization may not be natural. More to the piont, Nature is very effective at destroying civilization.
      • Re: Escaping the Malthusian Trap

        Tue, August 8, 2006 - 10:46 PM
        I think what is and isn't natural is relative.
        One must consider that "Nature" has been ineffective so far at keeping a balance, one might consider that perhaps humans themselves now have as much or more power than Nature. We have come to a point where we can to some point control Nature, or at least some aspects of her. We can cure the ill, grow things where they could never grow before, heck, we can even keep the dead alive.
        Perhaps... all this is what Nature intended. Perhaps Nature is planning our demise. If we continue on the current path though, we will destroy ourselves. What I'm wondering is... who will get there first?
        • Re: Escaping the Malthusian Trap

          Wed, August 9, 2006 - 9:52 AM
          it is natural to manipulate Nature, bees collect pollen and produce honey. Humans collect oil and create plastic... is this a false analogy? I am certainly not an advocate of plastic over honey, but I think that it's a VERY important part of understanding how we fit into the ecosystem. Ithink that there is also an argument that, really, EVERYTHING is natural since it is all coming from Nature. Our understanding has grown exponentially, especially in the last 150 years, but I think that our wisdom in HOW to use or IF we should use our awfully clever innovations, and society and civilization simply being how we choose to live amongst one another is evolving as much as we are. Some evolutionary directions lead species to survival, some to extinction. I think the test of our species is if our clever little minds can tell one from the other.

Recent topics in "Neo-tribalism"