> A layperson has no responsibility nor influence in that matter - that's something for policymakers and implementers to handle
If you start from belief that you and your children won't be able to influence policy and government, and people also can't make a difference by acting locally and practicing what they preach... you paint a pretty bleak picture.
It's always commendable to do your own share, but at the individual level, a single layperson choosing not to have kids won't have any significant affect on overpopulation. What matters is the actions of a large group of people, which is determined by culture makers and policy makers.
I'm not saying it's worthless to practice what you preach - rather, we can't rely on individual convictions as the solution to our collective problems. It certainly helps, but the majority of the solution will have to come from elsewhere.
> at the individual level, a single layperson choosing not to have kids won't have any significant affect on overpopulation.
Sorry, that's irrational. The only choices are individual ones -- governments can't really control what individuals do. Look at China's failed one-child policy.
Overpopulation results from billions of people rationalizing that their individual choice can't possibly matter.
> we can't rely on individual convictions as the solution to our collective problems.
What? Did I hear you right? Don't you understand that democracy is designed to honor and respect individual choices? The collective problem of overpopulation results from many individual choices to have children.
> the majority of the solution will have to come from elsewhere.
Healthy, non-dictatorial governments wait for the people to tell them what values to reflect and enforce. By contrast, dictators rely on the kind of person who says, "Let the experts solve these problems, individuals don't count."
On the positive side, education works wonders. Many studies show that educated women have smaller families.
Comments
> A layperson has no responsibility nor influence in that matter - that's something for policymakers and implementers to handle
If you start from belief that you and your children won't be able to influence policy and government, and people also can't make a difference by acting locally and practicing what they preach... you paint a pretty bleak picture.
It's always commendable to do your own share, but at the individual level, a single layperson choosing not to have kids won't have any significant affect on overpopulation. What matters is the actions of a large group of people, which is determined by culture makers and policy makers.
I'm not saying it's worthless to practice what you preach - rather, we can't rely on individual convictions as the solution to our collective problems. It certainly helps, but the majority of the solution will have to come from elsewhere.
> at the individual level, a single layperson choosing not to have kids won't have any significant affect on overpopulation.
Sorry, that's irrational. The only choices are individual ones -- governments can't really control what individuals do. Look at China's failed one-child policy.
Overpopulation results from billions of people rationalizing that their individual choice can't possibly matter.
> we can't rely on individual convictions as the solution to our collective problems.
What? Did I hear you right? Don't you understand that democracy is designed to honor and respect individual choices? The collective problem of overpopulation results from many individual choices to have children.
> the majority of the solution will have to come from elsewhere.
Healthy, non-dictatorial governments wait for the people to tell them what values to reflect and enforce. By contrast, dictators rely on the kind of person who says, "Let the experts solve these problems, individuals don't count."
On the positive side, education works wonders. Many studies show that educated women have smaller families.