Garrett Hardin Analysis

Throughout this reading by Garrett Hardin, he presented in a very scientific fashion, a theory of the population problem. He argued against the freedom to “breed”, with the worry that the worlds human population is growing exponentially even as our resources just become more limited. His conclusion when confronting this problem was that population needs to be controlled in some way. With the application of his theory he states that breeding rights is a common good, but the people that abuse that right are the ones pushing us closer to extinction. He points out the forces that he believes must change in order to stop the continued growth of population and after doing so he suggests solutions. The “over breeders” will eventually force the gene pool of people that acknowledge their

responsibility not to over use their breeding right out of existence. So with that belief, Hardin felt that one of the only valid solutions to this problem is to establish that breeding is not a freedom or a right. This extreme thought can be more easily grasped when comparing it to a already present law or restriction. When society made the “decision” that robbery was not a right, everyone became more free.

Then taking that concept and compare it to our over breeding problem. If our government executive leaders used their power to regulate family to family decisions such as the allowed amount of children it would in return make us all more free. This sounds simple enough, but the key question is how this restriction is to be achieved. Hardin argued against the notion that a boost in technology that increases food production will enable an unlimited population increase. “A finite world can support only a finite population.” There is no possible way to enhance the quality of life with the addition of population growth. The calories obtainable per person must decrease with the population population growth so both of these desires coexisting cannot become a reality. Consequently, Hardin voided Jeremy Bentham’s words, “the greatest good for the greatest number”, and opposed it by saying, "the optimum population is, then, less than the maximum.” We can’t effectively resolve population which is a collective problem when we act as if individual choices will get us where we want to go. There were also solutions Hardin rejected that individually branched off of his original

image of thought. When arguing against conscience he explains how it is not know if those traits are actually inheritable or effectively transmitted by learning in families. He makes a point to connect a lack of welfare with the consequence of having to deal with for their wasteful ness of the resources around them and also hinders how emotionally invested parents are in their children. In complication to this it could be said that welfare could truly be a part of solving our population growth situation.