Implementation of

Rapid population Decline

Expanding population allowed human groups to survive the ravages of disease, pestilence, famine and conflicts, for 5 million years. Expanding population improved a group's chances of winning wars. Expanding population determine democratic decisions. Expanding population provides more workers, to support, social organizations, industry, the arts, and science. Expanding population supports economic growth.

While these statements remain true today, they do not create a whole picture. Future costs, of an expanding population, may exceed these immediate benefits.

Already the most populous nation is no longer the most powerful in war. The nation with the most labor is not the wealthiest. Each increase in population - increases the depletion rate of nonrenewable resources. Each increase in population pushes humankind closer to, or extends it further beyond the earth's carrying capacity. Each increase in population, increases the rate of injury to that carrying capacity.

In this larger picture, economic adages like, pump priming, a rising tide raises all ships and trickle down benefits, are replaced by “zero sum game.” That is: with ever increasing frequency, the gain in well being of one person results in losses to may others. These increases in disenfranchisement -- increase social conflict. The global variable experiencing the most rapid growth from economic activity is not wellbeing but “conflict among people.”

It is not hard to show that to achieve the "improving-life” everyone wants, without ever-growing conflict, requires a rapidly contracting population (see proof SKIL Note 26.) To create abundance, peace, and environmental quality requires a choice of "one-child-per-family," universally taken among the global population for the next two centuries.

If you are a normal reader the above statements have little meaning. They will not motivate you to have only one-child-per-family. If you are beyond childbearing years, the statements will not motivate you to tell those about you to take an RPD procreative behavior or to create pro RPD institutional policy.

What does it mean if RPD is what is needed to reverse present tragic trends and no one realizes it? What does it mean when 6 billion people don't see where they are going. Or if they see where they are going, they don't know which behavior is taking them there? What does it mean when a simple explanation of the human predicament falls on unappreciative ears? What does it mean when a benevolent action like one-child-per- family is thought to be repugnant?

It means rational thought has been derailed. A thought process has been replaced by a rule of thumb that was never correct in the first place or the world has changed so it is not correct today.

It also means we have to create a logical reason to act not as our culture demands. That reason is that "graceful human existence" (SKIL Note 11 and 14) is not implemented with the culture's proposed behavior and it is implemented with RPD.

==> What are the steps to implementing RPD?

1) The first step is to create a small group of individuals with a second view of the human condition. This view, which, each person creates by connecting casual links among our system's variables, is similar to that presented in SKIL Note 26.

2) After obtaining this view, an individual will see a difference between these two ways of seeing the human condition. After he or she realizes that the presented mechanical view of the world will not change his or her procreative behaviors, the second step is to show that this absence of meaning, this absence of influence, of the mechanical view is actually the result of an underdeveloped cognitive process. He or she must be shown how his or her cognitive processes make errors in understanding and thus solving certain types of problems.

3) With knowledge of these cognitive process limitations, each person must be helped to redo his or her analysis of the human condition and the "number-of-children-per-family” behavior.

People who have gone through these three steps may still not change their behavior. But they may become the kernel of change. It is this group who will realize the importance of not going where we are headed. They will know we need to reverse course. They will know which behavior is taking us where we don't want to go, and what behavior will go where we want.

They will know that in the short run, the one-child-per-family behavior, must be encouraged by every personal and institutional process even thought the alternative behaviors seem more reasonable to the current public. They will know that in long-term, graceful human existence relies on having 6 billion people with cognitive capabilities that gather, process, and value information without the common cognitive limitations that hinder even well educated people today. They will know that basic cognitive science research that helps implement RPD is as important to the human condition as is research into the other physical or social sciences.

Creating this kernel is SKIL's current objective.


Jack Alpert (Bio)   mail to:      Other position papers

  (more details)