is based on the observation that the earth's resources are
finite. The impact of 1,000,000,000 humans is less than the
impact of 2,000,000,000.
And a lot less than the
current approx 7,300,000,000 up 7 times since 1900.
If this sounds
obvious, I propose that it can lead to tricky questions.
FOR EXAMPLE -- humankind in relation to the environment:
If we cut down a tree or trees to make a field
in which to grow wheat, what rights do the cut trees & the
species that live on and with them have in
relation to those who cut them?
Any? or Some?
If in doubt, extrapolate to cutting all the trees on the planet.
When do trees have rights?
Nature holds the
key to our aesthetic, intellectual, cognitive and even spiritual
satisfaction. You are capable of more than you know. We should
preserve every scrap of biodiversity as priceless while we learn
to use it and come to understand what it means to humanity - E.O.
Wilson .....or see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._O._Wilson + multiple other
web references & his books.
London -- How many cities, how many cranes, how much land for
The eminent American environmentalist, E.O. Wilson, says half
the world should be reserved for non human use.