site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   3608 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for October 30, 2022

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

4
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If our goal is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, is it better to kill 40 million median Americans or 40 million median Ugandians?

On one hand, one American emits 15x more greenhouse gases than one Ugandan. On the other hand, Ugandan TFR is 2x the replacement ratio, so their great-great-grandchildren will emit more than those of the Americans even without taking into account Ugandan economic growth and American decarbonization plans.

The former - nuclear war would reduce greenhouse gas emissions quickly and the ash would have a mild cooling effect.

Neither. By killing 40 million Americans, you would arguably (likely IMO) end up with worse global warming, since that devastating blow to the American economy would delay the invention and adaption of technology that replace fossil fuels and enable carbon capture. Dito for the Angolans.

Would killing 40 million African peasants be noticed by anyone except the peasants themselves? Not to sound rude, but my priors on ‘mass suffering and death in Africa’ is that it’s a page 8 story, and that on a slow news day.

When people say that utilitarians don't consider the second-order consequences of their actions, you know that's an outsider criticism, not a philosophical requirement, right?

More seriously: Ugandan TFR is 2x replacement right now, but a generation ago it was 3x replacement. Angola is still at 2.5x replacement, but they peaked at 3.5x two generations ago and are still falling. Their demographic transitions seem to be well underway already, so "TFR=constant" isn't even a good approximation right now, much less something you can extrapolate out for four more generations to come.

You are right, if Ugandan TFR is decreasing quickly towards replacement rate it makes no sense to try to adjust for it.

The 2022 UN World Population Prospects just came out. Under the medium fertility variant, the population of Uganda is projected to more than triple by the year 2100. The U.S. population is expected to increase by just 15%. More than 100% of the U.S. increase will be due to immigration.

While African fertility has been decreasing, the decrease has been much slower than other countries such as India and Iran where the TFR has come down rapidly. The UN projects that Ugandan TFR will fall to replacement (2.1) by the year 2071.

Just providing some context, not disputing the overall thrust of your comment.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats