Anybody for VHEM?

[Frank Lee]

Fuller's main premise was that nature's existing and omnipotent order must be allowed to guide designs made by man, if they are to survive and thrive as a species. Fuller wrote that humanity was approaching its "critical test" as a species, in which it would be determined "whether or not man was a mistake of nature, or its greatest accomplishment."

Why would Fuller say that? Because even back then he could see the environmental stress caused by humanity?

Why does nobody- well, james and I and a few others have mentioned it- address the quality of life issues of overpopulation? Maybe you guys LIKE long lines and congestion and chaos and no escape, but some of us don't.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

I suppose one could start a water fountain thread and see how that goes.

I prefer to derail existing threads rather than start my own.

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

Why would Fuller say that? Because even back then he could see the environmental stress caused by humanity?

Why does nobody- well, james and I and a few others have mentioned it- address the quality of life issues of overpopulation? Maybe you guys LIKE long lines and congestion and chaos and no escape, but some of us don't.

Are there long lines Up North? Have you tried living in previous eras to compare quality of life then, compared to now?

While it's impossible for me to know exactly what it was like to live with less people around, I'm fairly certain I enjoy antibiotics, plentiful food, electronics, leisure, and a relative lack of threat of enemy invasion.

I'd say that my quality of life is among the highest experienced by humanity. Perhaps there is a positive correlation between population and quality of life?

At any rate, Fuller is just pointing out the obvious that the rules of nature have winning strategies, and loosing ones. VHEM is a loosing one.

The real fear is Involuntary Human Extinction, which at the top of the threat list would include war/terrorism with biological/chemical/nuclear weapons. Have you seen Dr. Strangelove? It's terrifying that a species with so little understanding and control of their own emotions wields such great power.

[Frank Lee]

Yes, there are. There is no escape except in inhospitable wastelands.

I feel as though my points are clear and easily understood. If anyone doesn't get 'em it's because they're just being obtuse.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

While it's impossible for me to know exactly what it was like to live with less people around, I'm fairly certain I enjoy antibiotics, plentiful food, electronics, leisure, and a relative lack of threat of enemy invasion.

Antibiotics, electronics, and so on were made possible by a small fraction of the current population of the Earth. Indeed, to a good approximation, by a small fraction of the US and western Europe. And what with one thing and another, antibiotics are losing their effectiveness.

Plentiful food and leisure? Well, hunter-gatherers had that, and overall a more varied diet than most people in the West consume today. As for lack of threats of enemy invasion, read the news from Europe lately?

I'd say that my quality of life is among the highest experienced by humanity. Perhaps there is a positive correlation between population and quality of life?

You have to remember that correlation is not causation. Sure, some things have improved over time, while others have peaked and are now getting worse. But as above, the improvements are almost always created by a small fraction of the population.

The real fear is Involuntary Human Extinction, which at the top of the threat list would include war/terrorism with biological/chemical/nuclear weapons.

On the contrary, nuclear and/or biological war seem to be the only things that can possibly divert humanity (along with most vertebrate life) from its current headlong rush to involuntary extinction.

[freebeard]

Well, that certainly ended on a down note.

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

Why would Fuller say that? Because even back then he could see the environmental stress caused by humanity?

Yes, exactly. From about 1928 and on. He's considered the father of the environmental movement. He never said it was a sure bet — Utopia or Oblivion

Why does nobody- well, james and I and a few others have mentioned it- address the quality of life issues of overpopulation? Maybe you guys LIKE long lines and congestion and chaos and no escape, but some of us don't.

That's a design problem. Try here: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Buckminster_Fuller

1 Quotes
1.1 1920s–1950s
1.1.1 4D Timelock (1928)
1.2 1960s
1.2.1 Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth (1963)
1.2.2 Presentation to U.S. Congressional Sub-Committee on World Game (1969)
1.3 1970s
1.4 Synergetics: Explorations in the Geometry of Thinking (1975)
1.4.1 Moral of the work
1.4.2 The Wellspring of Reality
1.4.3 "Synergy" onwards
1.4.4 Afterpiece
1.5 From 1980s onwards
1.5.1 Norie Huddle interview (1981)
1.5.2 Critical Path (1981)
1.5.3 Grunch of Giants (1983)
1.5.4 Only Integrity is Going to Count (1983)
1.5.5 Cosmography (1992)
2 Misattributed
3 Quotes about Fuller
4 External links

[Frank Lee]

It's a units per square inch problem.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

Antibiotics, electronics, and so on were made possible by a small fraction of the current population of the Earth.

It took everyone and all of history up until now to come up with it, even if just a handful of people provided the incremental technological improvements. I could just as easily argue that 1 person could have invented everything in the world, but the reality is that it takes millions of minds to produce the best ideas.

Besides all that, it takes the labor of the many to provide for the needs of the few that innovate.

Plentiful food and leisure? Well, hunter-gatherers had that, and overall a more varied diet than most people in the West consume today.

Clearly false. Hunter-gatherers eat what they are lucky enough to stumble into in the environment, and then are subject to seasonal fluctuations in availability.

I'm able to gather ingredients from around the world for every meal. Bananas in the winter is no problem. I'd never eat one if I had to gather it from the PNW.

As for lack of threats of enemy invasion, read the news from Europe lately?

No, I'm not a consumer of the news. That said, violence is orders of magnitude less than in any period of time where populations were smaller. The trend toward decreasing violence persists despite enormous population growth. I don't even know anyone that has been killed violently. Back when the earth was vast compared to human populations, over half of adults would meet their end violently.

the improvements are almost always created by a small fraction of the population.

Again I'll point out that just because a few people can come up with great ideas doesn't mean we can select just those few geniuses to be born. It took everything that has happened in the past to arrive where we are today. Sure, it's not efficient, but it's effective.

On the contrary, nuclear and/or biological war seem to be the only things that can possibly divert humanity (along with most vertebrate life) from its current headlong rush to involuntary extinction.

And we're back to my assertion that having an abundance of children is not the natural thing we do when technology provides a means for our desires. Birth control and machines that accomplish labor intensive tasks make children unnecessary. We'll have quite the opposite problem in the future, even if we suffer some problems of overpopulation along the way.

https://youtu.be/c__XWMsz4aU

[rmay635703]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

It took everyone and all of history up until now to come up with it, even if just a handful of people provided the incremental technological improvements.
https://youtu.be/c__XWMsz4aU

The real answer is we are a people without history.

Many things could have been historically invented and ignored or wiped away by stupidity, like certain historical libraries (first in greece, then off the tip of africa by the Spanish).

The truth is we may well have known how to care for ourselves as well or better historically but we have no real idea of the events from 7000 years ago are.

The truth is no where in our recorded history has our population continued on the type of upward trend that it has experienced recently.

Based on birth rates we are likely going to end up in decline in 20 years or so but how do we deal with the exponential rise in disease caused by our own arrogance?

It is far easier to have a lower population and live more freely than to have a very high one on the edge with many constraints and artificial means to prop it up, burning through resources faster than they are created.

I'm not sure what environment you want to live in, but I rather have things free and less complex, without a boogieman to keep people in line.

Ah well.

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

Maybe you guys LIKE long lines and congestion and chaos and no escape, but some of us don't.

Where's the hogsheads per furlong in that? Those are specifically Design Science problems, badly resolved.

Let's try Alan Kay: "The best way to predict the future is to invent it."

Edit:

Originally Posted by rmay635703

Many things could have been historically invented and ignored or wiped away by stupidity, like certain historical libraries (first in greece, then off the tip of africa by the Spanish).

Citation[s] needed. TIA

I'm not sure what environment you want to live in, but I rather have things free and less complex, without a boogieman to keep people in line.

http://theanarchistlibrary.org/libra...y-surprise-you

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

It took everyone and all of history up until now to come up with it, even if just a handful of people provided the incremental technological improvements. I could just as easily argue that 1 person could have invented everything in the world, but the reality is that it takes millions of minds to produce the best ideas.

Besides all that, it takes the labor of the many to provide for the needs of the few that innovate.

Hardly. As a pretty obvious example, suppose that as of start of the industrial revolution, the entire population of Asia, Africa, and South America had died from a plague. Would the technological development of Europe and North America been significantly different?

I'm able to gather ingredients from around the world for every meal. Bananas in the winter is no problem. I'd never eat one if I had to gather it from the PNW.

But there are dozens, perhaps hundreds, of equally edible things which you could gather from your own neighborhood (assuming it's rural): everything from blackberries to camas to salmon. Likewise many things that were quite usual in at least some European-culture diets until the last century. You may be able to get a banana in the store, but how often do you see quince, cornelian cherries, gooseberries, currants, medlars, and more? (I happen to have all but the medlar growing in my garden, and I assure you they're all as delicious as that banana. Especially cornelian cherry jam :-))

Birth control and machines that accomplish labor intensive tasks make children unnecessary.

But in this world, the vast majority of parents don't have children because they're necessary; they have them(simplistically, of course) either for ego gratification (think Duggars here) or to meet societal expectations. Consider the number of people in the west who resort to fertility drugs, in vitro fertilization, and the upcoming uterus transplant.