In response to comment by Steko on SIA won't doom you
Comment author: knb 26 March 2010 05:28:03PM 1 point [-]

This is true because there are still many good reasons to have children.

Children have gone from being productive capital goods to consumption goods. I don't see any evidence that children are losing or will lose their value as consumption goods.

I'm saying that the zero population growth faction will be a tiny minority by the time a civilization grows large and advanced all the selection pressure works against the zero-population growth/non-expansion faction.

In response to comment by knb on SIA won't doom you
Comment author: Steko 26 March 2010 09:31:14PM *  1 point [-]

"Children have gone from being productive capital goods to consumption goods. I don't see any evidence that children are losing or will lose their value as consumption goods."

Wait -- the value of children recently changed fundamentally but we should expect no more change far in the future?

"I'm saying that the zero population growth faction will be a tiny minority by the time a civilization grows large and advanced."

This does not reconcile at all with current population trends of developed nations. The UN medium projection for 2050 has the entire world at 2.02. Go ahead and assume people still want children as consumption goods, data suggests that not enough of them want this to maintain even zero population growth beyond the current century.

In response to comment by Steko on SIA won't doom you
Comment author: knb 26 March 2010 05:05:04AM 1 point [-]

I highly doubt there will be any disagreement about the merits and needs of colonization within a civilization capable of intergalactic travel - it will either be a good idea and they will agree or it will be a bad idea and they will agree not to.

There are such disagreements in our civilization. Why would more advanced civilizations stop having value disagreements? Unless almost all civilizations end in singletons, such values disputes seem likely.

There may be very few to no more humans born after say 2300 AD. And that's because people don't need offspring to work in the fields anymore, don't fulfill their sexual needs like other animals, have incredibly inflated lifespans, etc.

This is hugely unlikely. We currently have the ability to turn reproduction off. Yet many people go to extraordinary lengths to turn reproduction on. There are population subgroups within almost every major country that exhibit strong pro-natalist tendencies, and have preferences for large-to-huge families. There are many such groups just in the United States (fundamentalist Mormons, "Quiverfull" folks, Amish, Hutterites, etc. If even a small minority opts to reproduce and expand, they will have huge selective advantages over those who opt out of reproduction and expansion.

Non-expansion is not evolutionarily stable.

In response to comment by knb on SIA won't doom you
Comment author: Steko 26 March 2010 04:07:28PM -1 points [-]

"We currently have the ability to turn reproduction off. Yet many people go to extraordinary lengths to turn reproduction on. "

This is true because there are still many good reasons to have children. I don't see any of these reasons being certain and compelling by the time intergalactic travel is possible. We haven't even scratched the surface on what technology is going to do to economics and already the maternity rate in prosperous countries is below replacement. We may well expand forever but I don't think it's at all obvious.

"If even a small minority opts to reproduce and expand, they will have huge selective advantages over those who opt out of reproduction and expansion."

What if a small minority wanted to kill everyone? As technology increases (to the point of allowing things like an independent faction to do this), you have to assume there would be strong pressures and protections in place to prevent the sort of factionalism that currently dominates. And if a large, technologically advanced majority doesn't want you to reproduce I'd guess you are not going to reproduce.

In response to comment by Steko on SIA won't doom you
Comment author: James_Miller 26 March 2010 01:17:08AM 1 point [-]

If only a tiny percent of an advanced civilization wants to colonize new worlds then the civilization will grow at an exponential rate. Also, unless the laws of physics are very different from what we think, most civilizations would try to capture free energy and either turn off stars or capture all the energy being radiated from the stars.

Comment author: Steko 26 March 2010 02:14:10AM 0 points [-]

I find all of these propositions questionable. It's not clear at all that they will need to (1) reproduce (2) relocate or (3) capture an absurd amount of free energy. We can speculate they might want to do any of those but the arguments that they won't seem just as strong.

I highly doubt there will be any disagreement about the merits and needs of colonization within a civilization capable of intergalactic travel - it will either be a good idea and they will agree or it will be a bad idea and they will agree not to.

Seeing no evidence of colonization (and knowing that if they all do it they If they will come into conflict with each other and risk their extinction) let's suggest they all decide not to do it is a reasonable possibility.

Then timtyler's point is easy to see: this isn't so much about doomsday as about a change in society that devalues reproduction and expansion. There may be very few to no more humans born after say 2300 AD. And that's because people don't need offspring to work in the fields anymore, don't fulfill their sexual needs like other animals, have incredibly inflated lifespans, etc.

Comment author: James_Miller 26 March 2010 12:25:21AM 1 point [-]

What kind of terminal setback other than extinction, would stop humanity from making significant "progress towards galactic civilisation" sometime during, say, the next 100 million years?

Comment author: Steko 26 March 2010 01:07:22AM 0 points [-]

Colonies and expanding populations likely become irrelevant once you approach the level of technology necessary for intergalactic travel. Quite possibly communication as well.