The Tragedy of the Commons
Garrett Hardin
Hardin first discusses that the population problem cannot have a technical solution. Tragedy in a commons exists because each man pursues his best interest. But in a limited world with everyman only thinking for himself and a society that believes in freedom, it is the freedom in a commons that will always end in tragedy. We have known about this idea of tragedy of freedom in a commons for a long time and it has constantly been refreshed with new examples in our societies. What Hardin is trying to say is that anything that is free to all people but is limited will ultimately result in an over use of resources and end in a tragedy.
Tragedy of the commons also appears in the problems of pollution. Since we are all using a resource and getting something out of it we are also putting things into it. Since everyone thinks what they are doing on an individual level we believe that costs of the waste we discharge is smaller than the costs of purifying them before they go in. But when thinking about it on a global scale it results in mass pollution and more cost. The concept of private property also causes more harm than good because people see it as their right to harm the environment that they legally own but they will ultimately damage our entire ecosystem which no one owns. The pollution problem is a consequence of an ever growing population which requires us to constantly redefine our rules.
If our world went by "only the strongest survive" then the world wouldn't be concerned with controlling human breeding because if you couldn't support your children then they wouldn't survive and you would be less likely to breed. But since our societies are concerned with the welfare of others, more people are breeding and more support is being given to those that cannot support families on their own. This has resulted in over population and family size limit controversies. The breeding problem is hereditary and a conscience effort must be made to help reduce it, but it will be difficult to become fully reduced.
He then talks about mutual coercion and the things in society that we do not necessarily enjoy but that we all mutually agree to do in order to escape the horror of the commons. He also discusses how we do not forbid citizens to do some things but doing them with become increasingly risky and/or costly with time, which prevents them from being done. He gives examples of how our legal system of private property and inheritance is unjust, but everybody puts up with it because there is no better system.
He comes to a conclusion that the commons is only justifiable under conditions of a low population. As the human population rises the commons has had to be abandoned one aspect after another. Starting with food gathering and the shared resources they come from. The tragedy is then waste disposal becoming an increasingly large issue. Our aspects of pleasure and convenience have also changed the way we live. He then discusses the old and newly proposed thoughts of rights and freedoms and how they have changed. But what does freedom actually mean, some say "freedom is the recognition of necessity." The most important aspect is the recognition of the impact of breeding. He states that we must stop the freedom to breed in order to end the tragedy of the commons and that all of these tragedies are a result of over population.
Garrett Hardin
Hardin first discusses that the population problem cannot have a technical solution. Tragedy in a commons exists because each man pursues his best interest. But in a limited world with everyman only thinking for himself and a society that believes in freedom, it is the freedom in a commons that will always end in tragedy. We have known about this idea of tragedy of freedom in a commons for a long time and it has constantly been refreshed with new examples in our societies. What Hardin is trying to say is that anything that is free to all people but is limited will ultimately result in an over use of resources and end in a tragedy.
Tragedy of the commons also appears in the problems of pollution. Since we are all using a resource and getting something out of it we are also putting things into it. Since everyone thinks what they are doing on an individual level we believe that costs of the waste we discharge is smaller than the costs of purifying them before they go in. But when thinking about it on a global scale it results in mass pollution and more cost. The concept of private property also causes more harm than good because people see it as their right to harm the environment that they legally own but they will ultimately damage our entire ecosystem which no one owns. The pollution problem is a consequence of an ever growing population which requires us to constantly redefine our rules.
If our world went by "only the strongest survive" then the world wouldn't be concerned with controlling human breeding because if you couldn't support your children then they wouldn't survive and you would be less likely to breed. But since our societies are concerned with the welfare of others, more people are breeding and more support is being given to those that cannot support families on their own. This has resulted in over population and family size limit controversies. The breeding problem is hereditary and a conscience effort must be made to help reduce it, but it will be difficult to become fully reduced.
He then talks about mutual coercion and the things in society that we do not necessarily enjoy but that we all mutually agree to do in order to escape the horror of the commons. He also discusses how we do not forbid citizens to do some things but doing them with become increasingly risky and/or costly with time, which prevents them from being done. He gives examples of how our legal system of private property and inheritance is unjust, but everybody puts up with it because there is no better system.
He comes to a conclusion that the commons is only justifiable under conditions of a low population. As the human population rises the commons has had to be abandoned one aspect after another. Starting with food gathering and the shared resources they come from. The tragedy is then waste disposal becoming an increasingly large issue. Our aspects of pleasure and convenience have also changed the way we live. He then discusses the old and newly proposed thoughts of rights and freedoms and how they have changed. But what does freedom actually mean, some say "freedom is the recognition of necessity." The most important aspect is the recognition of the impact of breeding. He states that we must stop the freedom to breed in order to end the tragedy of the commons and that all of these tragedies are a result of over population.
No comments:
Post a Comment