Declining Fertility
Across the world, fertility rates are falling. Wealthy places
like Japan and Western Europe have the most serious problems. I
wonder if this is due to a failure of specialization. Human
society is increasingly specialized. Instead of growing our own
food and making our own tools, we engage in a specific occupation -
computer programming, research, accounting, etc. - and delegate other
tasks to strangers. In societies with very high levels of
specialization, perhaps it is unnatural for each unit to bear
children. Ants and bees delegate the task of bearing progeny to
one member of their society. A specialized group rears the
younglings. Will our society eventually move in this
direction? Schooling, nannies, and surrogate pregnancy might be
elements of this. What will our society look like if we go all
the way? Will the family go the way of the family farm?
Will we construct centralized facilities to develop children? I
wonder what it would be like to live in a society like that. It
all seems so repugnant and alien today. Then again, I suppose
every generation feels that way. Maybe I’m the grumpy old man of
tomorrow, reminiscing about the good old days before they’ve come to an
end.
y
March 16, 2005 @ 9:41 pm
as a consequence of free market, the better educated (presumably, those with better genes) are not procreating. the result of this “efficient”, self-regulating specialization is that the society will become dumber. this market, along with many others, is perfect candidate for regulation. your farms of the future should select the best specimen for breeding. let Reason reign.
H~
March 20, 2005 @ 8:37 pm
I think we are witnessing effect of spirits not wanting to take human form at this time. Look at the present condition of the world. It is in tremendous torment. Those that come here are ready to bring change, many are not and so they go elsewhere.
Family shall evolve as all of us human’s must, but not the way of a breeding farm. Humans themselves will become more selective in allowing themselves to create new life, until they, and the spirits they bring in, are ready for it.
Perhaps declining fertility is really the result of us as a whole realizing that we can’t continue to over populate the Earth as we have?
H~
laura
December 3, 2005 @ 10:22 pm
I don’t know exactly where I have ‘landed’, but hey, it’s interesting. your theories are good, but I think you might be digging too deep.
I live in ‘western eruope’ myself and can quite confidently say that the problem is not our compassion with the world and the disruption of any natural balance by humans, nor is it that the free market does not allow procreation for some vague elite (if you ask me, most problems arise from people thinking they know better/they are the elite/they have more value).
Though it does have something to do with freedom and free markets. But I don’t mean american freedom (I swear, the european/germanic and such ‘freedom’ is way different then the 20th century american one).
Europe is a very small continent made out of small countries (as I hope you know), and clearly so must then be western europe. The comparative population rates city-’country-side’ bare a humungous difference; 28% of the population lives spread over 55% of the country in small villages and such, which means 72% of the pop. lives in the remaining 45% of the country. There are more such facts, but specifying on them would make this argument unnecessarily extensive and potentially boring.
It is relatively generally assumed that city-life is much more hectic, fast, but also more emancipated and progressive. WOmen in cities tend rather to commit to a carreer, independence and accomplishment before thinking of settling down and getting kids.
The fast lifestyle and high competition for (good) jobs and carreers just does not allow pregnancy leave. And even if it does (like the dutch government has made possible), many are still reluctant for the simple issue that you do not just get a child to procreate, throw it into this world and leave it be, no, women tend to want to care for their child.
And see, that does explain a lot.
I know it is along the lines that dutch policies imply.
I did not quite finish my argument, but this is turning into some kind of essay
laura
December 3, 2005 @ 10:24 pm
one additional detail; the %s are for the Netherlands, not the whole of western europe
Eric Perramond
July 27, 2006 @ 11:27 am
Wow, it’s called the demographic transition model, been around since the 1950s. Honestly, people, this is old news. It’s as if socio-biology is being embraced as a “see I told you so” school of logic, which it isn’t. You’re using a very barbaric biological reasoning to justify what is occurring. Egads.
naz
June 1, 2007 @ 7:14 am
Famous people are already buying children from third world countries. People are paying surrogate mothers to have their babies. Centralisation seems logical, but humans aren’t always logical.
Anonymous
March 19, 2008 @ 10:40 am
people are not having kids becuse kids suck and take up all your time. why have kids if you can party.and more money you have the more reason to go out and have fun.if choices are sex drugs &rock&roll or bearing children what would you choose.thanks for listning i have to go now baby is crying