Human overpopulation case
Human population is taught to be unsustainable concerning the resources. The anxiety is caused by the rapid increase in the 19th and 20th century. Yet the concerns fail to notice the growth rate is decreasing and the decrease will be a concern in the future. It is is actually a human cognitive error to look at the past events and fallaciously decide that we’ll slip down from the their theoretical slope.
Humans as ends not means
Any organism would naturally reproduce to become more of itself, not some humans apparently. On top of that, humanity is not like the other businesses to be decided on descriptive statements such as graphs and balance sheets. Humans are the actual subjects, the agents that solve the problem. We will have more problem solvers, not crises but the opportunities. When we think of humans, we have to lift the discussion to second order, above anything else.
Why not a trillion?
Decision makers are worried over 8 billion population, yet they have to be worried why not a trillion but 8 billion? Thomas Malthuss was concerned over 800 million people and proposed measures to decrease the growth. What he did was a basic human error, a psychological tendency to look at future with the grounds of the past. We don’t know what the future holds. In fact these concerns was relieved by the new techniques in food production and birth control in developed countries. In fact birth control may have actually harmed the humankind. Enlightened societies were slowed in reproduction and we were left with less capable people to solve problems. Population measures decrease growth in developed countries and perhaps increase in underdeveloped countries since people feel threatened when an actor takes an action towards their society.
We should actually aim for as much as people possible. It’s possible if you don’t take humans as means but ends. Let’s turn the galaxy in to a human galaxy, why don’t we transform the universe to this cosmic marvel, called human consciousness. From a different viewpoint, the stomach is actually a transforming device, for us to increase consciousness. Any organism naturally does it, any society culturally does it as well.
Depression and anxiety
The problem is actually one sided view on humanity. If you look at the species as a work-force, yes you may not need that much people. Necessities depend on the perspective. The need for humans was to put into labor. The investors needed humans as a part of their industry, yet they have automation right now. The need for humans should be intellectual purposes. Besides, intellectual capital doesn’t only belong to corporate, it mostly belongs to social institutions and become the humanity capital, the vast fortune of human culture.
If we judge looking at the past, we will be depressed, judging with historical function of people. If we look at future on the grounds of the past, we will be anxious about the overpopulation. We can overcome depression and anxiety by changing the perspective and having a proper humanistic aim. The aim should be more than the corporate, capitalist gains from the people. Eliminating people is actually avoiding the challenge, for worse challenges. This evasion stems from the inability to turn the crisis into an opportunity. Individuals may run away from their problems, but societies must fight and see them as opportunities. What if population increased and that is an opportunity?
Human overpopulation as a cure
After 1968 the global population growth rate started a long decline, and in the period 2022–2027 the UN estimates it to be about 0.9%https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_decline#:~:text=But%20after%201968%20the%20global,during%20the%20period%201962%20%2D%201968.
There is more in this equation than historical graphics and classical theories of economy. The human population growth is decreasing. The future holds a scarcity for humans, concerning the values that individuals may create in the abundance of information age. What is more the fertility rates are rapidly declining and we may not reproduce even if we want to. So, overpopulation may be a chance to reproduce while we can
Instead of relying mathematical models relying on past methods and historical data, we should rely on our aims to expand human consciousness throughout the universe. Resources are essential yes, but they can be multiplied by humans through new techniques. Population worriers are worrying over the past data. If humanity was to grow according to past data, the world can only sustain a few hunter gatherers; but we didn’t get anxious about it and kept on growing.
Is human overpopulation a population problem?
The population problem is not a population, in other words, opportunity problem. The problem is being incapable of noticing the simple difference that humans are not means but ends. In a world that is governed by traders, it’s possible that humans are burden. In a world that is governed by philosophers that would drastically change.
How can we know we’re overpopulated without knowing what the future holds? Who is responsible on deciding what type or how many people we need, according to what? What are the criteria to judge who lives and who dies? Is the real problem population? or is it a lack of reflective thinking? Is the problem caused by self fulfilling prophecies of doom sayers?