I’m trying to reconcile claims about continued population growth with what we often see in natural systems, where populations tend to move toward some form of equilibrium over time.
In ecology, for example, predator–prey dynamics (like deer and wolves) create feedback loops that prevent indefinite growth. While humans obviously don’t follow the same biological constraints, it seems we do have our own balancing mechanisms—economic, social, and cultural. As well as human caused climate change/pollution can also be affecting the ability for women to become pregnant?
For instance, in many developed countries, declining fertility rates suggest that as societies become more urbanized, educated, and economically stable, population growth slows or even reverses. That looks less like “explosive growth indefinitely” and more like a transition toward stabilization.
So my question is:
To what extent do EA models account for these kinds of equilibrium dynamics—especially demographic transitions and declining birth rates?
And under what assumptions would continued large-scale growth still hold?
Wow this is another mind-blower. Is it akin to the idea of perception? or self fulfilling prophecy? For example, if I think Person A is not trustworthy then I will gravitate towards find evidence to support my perception? Why did I think Person A wasn’t trustworthy in the first place? was it from a feeling? an actual action that took place between me and Person A? Or that Person B told me that Person A wasn’t trustworthy; but since I trust Person B I believe what Person B is telling me about Person A?