Sola
beta
a year

Political Sextant (Politicalsextant)

Here's the third question from political sextant quiz. Link here if you want to take the whole quiz.

Large scale civilizations are unsustainable.
45%Disgree
0%Sightly disagree
18%No opinion
27%Sightly agree
9%Agree
11 votes

Pros: It is not worth trying to make the megacities and countries of millions of people not harm the environment as these are inherently polluting and use up the resources more quickly than the planet can sustainably produce them. Small societies are also the only way to nurture decent human relationships as large society simply makes us strangers.

Cons: Large-scale societies have allowed us to produce such elevated forms of art and science that would have otherwise been impossible to attain.

40votes
0SOL earned
Vote
Share
Vote
Share
5
80
40
United States of America, Fremont
5 comments
JackTheAle
Totally disagree, everything is possibile if we really want, and also with the new technology and new research we can really change the world(in positive😉)
Hans Bauer
All else being equal (environmental impact for example), would it be better to have 1 billion people for 100'000 more years, or to have 1 trillion people for 100 more years? At the end the earth would just explode at an instant or something I guess, so nobody suffers at the end, and the life quality is exactly the same
Philo 0316Author
I think quality of life is probably important here. If everyone's living on Earth and environmental impact is the same, then we can't keep the quality of life the same. But honestly, even then, I'm not really sure which would be better.
Hans Bauer
Philo 0316, Yeah. Large societies have better technology and more efficiency. But small societies have more space and ressources than they need. That could prevent conflicts. It's kind of tricky
Write something...
Send