= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
b1shop comments on Against the standard narrative of human sexual evolution - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (153)
I don't want to say Malthus is wrong. His conclusions flow naturally from his assumptions.
Perhaps both sides of this spat could simply say Malthus is irrelevant when his assumptions (positive relationship between wealth and birth rates, population grows faster than economy) don't hold?
This is the correct view; his argument is practically deductive, and the only way around it is to take one of his escape holes: people collectively choosing a higher standard of living rather than offspring. The real questions we should be discussing are:
Question 4 leads us right into Robin Hanson's crack of a future dawn and Dream Time scenario.
Applied to the argument in the post, the correct view is simply that Malthus was right.
Applied to understanding of Malthus and Darwin in general I agree with your comment.
The demographic transition is temporary unless natural selection can't influence desire for offspring. Hanson I think makes a similar argument as to why the future in his view is probably sort of Malthusian.