It took three years of post-secondary schooling for me to realise that I can study things I'm passionate about. For some odd reason I started in history, probably because it's a "hard" discipline we are trained to think will take you somewhere. By "hard" discipline I mean that most, if not all schools teach some form of history and additionally, maths and sciences. These are methods of study we are expected to know some form of.
My point here is in my fourth year of post-secondary education and my first year in environment-related studies, I got to thinking about human impact and population levels. My undergrad was a time for me to have simplistic thoughts about very complex issues, I looked at ideas with a lens that I would refer to as "my own ideal world." Now, three years later, a little jaded, but in all honesty no less hopeful. The only real difference is I am a little more hesitant to throw down any of my very bold statements.
In my fourth year of undergrad, I started to subscribe to ideas that paralleled Thomas Malthus and Paul Ehrlich - the world was going to face devastating consequences if population levels continued to rise. I would throw out bold comments stating that people shouldn't live in areas that were simply not sustainable, usually alluding to those who live in the Global South. Again, not so simple.
It's seems like a real economic crunch, although, I really don't want that to be the focus about what I took away from Dr. Evan Fraser's lecture today. I really walked away with a well-rounded perspective on the different interpretations of the population problem. I academically met a fellow by the name of Julian Simon, a Professor of Business administration in the US. He sadly kicked fourteen years ago at the tender age of sixty five. Simon challenged American Biologist Paul Ehrlich in 1980 to a bet that contested resource scarcity over the span of ten years. Simon asked Ehrlich to choose five metals that they would purchase, in turn they would allow their value to mature. Simon claimed that the value would decrease, while Ehrlich believed they would rise. The winner was to receive the profits of the metals, whatever it may be. In those ten years, the world's population grew an astounding 800 million and the price of the select metals dropped significantly. In October 1990, Ehrlich mailed Simon a cheque for $576.07.
The span of this humourous debate is not an accurate capture of the flux of the value of the select metals. The time span really doesn't give justice to value. Not much more to say about it, just good academic chatter.
Cassandra metaphor is a concept that is applied in situations in which valid warnings or concerns are dismissed or disbelieved.
I=PAT does not resonate with me. I have many criticisms that I wish I had the time to drop down on here!
I feel the more I study over-population the more I stray away from fatalism. I am however very afraid of overpopulation and exponential population growth. It's on the back burner for certain.
No comments:
Post a Comment