Philosophy Now Forum

...likewise! Glad we found an area of agreement! LOL. I'm not against the environment. I just think the issues are a lot more nuanced than many people realize. You have 2.5 billion people without access to sanitation, 780 billion without access to a steady supply of clean drinking water. Without ec...

If you think I'm being merely self-righteous there's nothing more to discuss though I have noticed how well you conform to these attributes in your solicitations of the poor as defense for current environment policies. Well if you have no substantive points to make I guess we're done. I haven't got...

Retreat now (if still possible) and win in the future for as you say “never underestimate the human race” rather than lose now and diminish forever the human capacity for self-preservation. You don’t think that’s possible in a world so intensely ruled by expediency meaning short-changing the future...

I don't know how of this relates to what I wrote so I can't respond. Briefly, environmental action is directly opposed to the well-being of impoverished people in the third world. As one example, when you use legislation to force power companies to reduce emissions, you make energy more expensive. ...

It doesn't bode well for any species anywhere in the universe except for those perspicacious enough to short-circuit catastrophe. So you would favor killing all the poor third-worlders rather than supporting growth policies to lift them out of poverty? Environmentalism at all costs? Have you given ...

Thomas Malthus was the first population gloom-and-doomer in 1798. His predictions turned out to be wrong. Paul Erlich was another famous population gloom-and-doomer in 1968. He made a series of specific predictions about the future price and availability of various natural resources. Every one of hi...

When there is not clean water for everybody it's a fact that the Earth is Overpopulated. When there's not enough food for everybody for a healthy diet (let's say the fish). When the sea has a plastics problem. When species go extinct as never before. When Wildlife has never been smaller. When bees ...

Then again, the lack of population increase is unique to the western world. The world has been overpopulating, because the third world economies demand and create a high birth rate. Right. And as the third world economies modernize, the birth rate goes down. And when global elites tell the third wo...

The problem you presented is a problem only affecting 20% of the world's population, while the problem you are denying is affecting 100% of the world's population. Your thesis was not sensible, because it was near-sighted, ignored too large amount of facts, and was misleading in its conclusion. The...

I have several disagreements with what you've said. For now I'll focus on Aleph one which is the size of the set of the real numbers (its cardinality) and can't be put into one-to-one correspondence with the natural numbers. There are several proofs of this, most notably Cantor's diagonal proof. Ph...

Are you saying that global warming and sealevel rising aren't real problems? You asked about population. I suggested the counterintuitive but very sensible thesis that the biggest population-related problem is underpopulation, not overpopulation as is commonly believed. Are you saying you don't lik...

If not now, when do you think that will occur? Do you foresee solutions? For example, cemeteries keep growing. Besides sending the dead into space or turning bones into ashes, what would be a solution so that the living may have space to live? There are many implications to this problem. There is a...

Don't mean to contradict WTF. If you have facts that contradict me then fire away, maybe I'll learn something. Here's what I've read from various sources: You're going to need better sources. Aleph 0 or Aleph null is the infinity of the natural numbers. Tru dat. Aleph 1 is the infinity of the real ...

I would say pick what you're most interested in or comfortable with. This is one reason why I put up this type of thread so that we can learn. Well then I'll ramble about completeness a bit. Actually you raised a good issue, which is that technical terms can have different meanings in different are...

IOW, the number of points is independent of distance. Any comments? Right. The number of points isn't even related to dimension. The unit interval is cardinally equivalent to the unit n-cube in Euclidean n-space. And that's cardinally equivalent to the entire infinite extent of Euclidean n-space. C...