With an excessively growing population, human might be increasingly conflicting with the environment. How might we perceive our relations with the environment? Our advancement in civilization might bring benefits to the environment?

Thoughts after more than half a year: After watching Han Rosling Ted talk, I believe that the world population will stop growing with better development in less well-off countries.

  • 3
    Some geologists have named our era the Anthropocene because of the huge effects we are having on the world at large. – Mozibur Ullah Jan 16 '18 at 14:23
  • 3
    "human existence should be good to the economy" In what sense ? What is "economy" without human society ? – Mauro ALLEGRANZA Jan 16 '18 at 14:30
  • Human normally produce products or services? – user43529463 Jan 17 '18 at 6:05
  • Xyzabc you are asking about babies. Couples will know what to do. Look now what WE are doing with these machines called robots. At least in the short term they will be disruptive, they will depress wages, what will we do? Watch and I think you will see that humans will adjust the population appropriately. I don't know for sure, we'll see. – Gordon Jan 17 '18 at 20:19
  • The economy is not for itself, it is for us. We created this object, we stand behind it. And it may be that it is time to take the reigns and direct it more appropriately. – Gordon Jan 17 '18 at 20:29
  1. Human existence does not as such harm the environment. Suppose there were only ten humans in the world.

  2. It is not the current level of population that harms the environment but the way in which we currently live. We do indeed cause harm to the environment at considerable risk to our own present and future well-being. But an environmentally-friendly economy and way of life could minimise if not remove the harm. It's how we live that harms the environment, not the size of the earth's population.

  3. It is not clear how much population growth the earth could sustain if we switched to an environmentally-friendly economy and way of life.

What the realistic chances are that we will adopt an enviromnmentally-friendly way of life, I don't know - I am not optimistic. But the three points above still apply.

  • @xyzabc. You have an answer to your question. – Geoffrey Thomas Jan 25 '18 at 11:29
  • @ Geoffrey Thomas. It is how we perceive our relationship with the environment matters. Human existence, given finite resources, if we only had an optimal population, perhaps the environment can have much time to self-recover and adapt? – user43529463 Feb 8 '18 at 11:21
  • @ Geoffrey Thomas. Perhaps we values more on our achievements on the advancement of civilisation than our environment. – user43529463 Feb 8 '18 at 11:23
  • @@xyzabc.. Thank you for your comments, with which I agree. We should all be grateful to you for raising your question. Best : GT – Geoffrey Thomas Feb 8 '18 at 11:29
  • @ The question popped out in my head so frequently during my undergraduate study that I decided to say it. – user43529463 Feb 8 '18 at 11:32

How might we perceive our relations with the environment? Our advancement in civilization might bring benefits to the environment?

The Living world on the planet is diverse and humans are a very small domain in our 'biodiversity' population wise as well as in number-

However, humans are so much focussed on their own things, the lifestyles, food, the facilities to use natural resources that they have disturbed the ecosystem- not by sheer number but by introducing 'new' chemicals, processes which can not be adjusted in the natural chain of transformations so that effects of climate change are being observed worldwide.

Even at the present stage of amplification of disasters, many governments are in denial mode of environmental degradation. (the US being a prime example)

The cure is in dealing with climate change effects using the natural processes and getting rid of those technologies which directly forces the carbon concentration in the atmosphere.

The major stumbling block in carbon-mitigation is the 'old techniques' which were not eco-friendly and the investors are resisting the change.

The military-industrial complex has to transform in an atmosphere of cooperation and peace so that the capital investment in those sectors can be moved to 'welfare' effort of the large masses in developing the world.

The approach must sustain the living condition of humans on this planet.

One must consume the planet's resources in a manner that the return replenishes the reserve for coming generation.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.