From: William John (health2u@biogate.com)
Date: Sun Jul 26 1998 - 17:50:41 MDT
>From: "Nick Bostrom" <bostrom@ndirect.co.uk>
>This answer should probably be shortened and simplified a bit
>Won't extended life worsen overpopulation problems?
I don't know if it needs to be shortened. If you don't mind, I'd like to
copy it in its entirety as a separate FAQ sub-page due to its length on my
web site. **However**, I think that - other than religious queasiness of
some - this may be the most often quoted objection I've heard to
life-extension generally from scientifically-literate or at least inclined
lay people. I think that actually the birth rate for longer-lived people
will go down per unit time because the primarily biopsychological imperative
behind reproduction is to replace your self genetically (and also transfer
your value system or worldview to the next generation). This replacement
drive will not disappear but I think will ***lower*** the birth rate per
unit time. (obvious one kind per hundred years still results in 5 kids in
500 years whereas 3 per 70 finite years is lower but the rate is number
divided by unit time.....more time to make the scientific advancements in
food, space <e.g. terraforming other planets>, etc.) I haven't focused on
this argument extensively because I haven't ever received input from others.
What do you think of the above argument about lower overall birthrate per
unit time for longer-living people?
Sincerely,
-William John
Web Master
Futurist Think Tank
http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/9356/index.html
mailto:health2u@biogate.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:24 MST