赌注:保罗·埃利希、朱利安·西蒙和我们对地球未来的赌博

Richard B. Miller
{"title":"赌注:保罗·埃利希、朱利安·西蒙和我们对地球未来的赌博","authors":"Richard B. Miller","doi":"10.5860/choice.51-3963","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"THE BET: PAUL EHRLICH, JULIAN SIMON, AND OUR GAMBLE OVER EARTH'S FUTUREBy Paul Sabin, Yale University Press 2013It seems a matter of common sense that infinite resources do not exist, and we should, therefore, use our resources carefully. But it is a mistake to understate the impact of human ingenuity and market economics on the demand for resources we are inclined to think of as essential. This more complex truth was well understood by the Saudi Arabian oil minister, Sheikh Zaki Yamani, who famously stated that \"[the] Stone Age did not end for lack of stone, and the Oil Age will end long before the world runs out of oil.\"1 The story of this more complex truth about resource scarcity and its relationship to the modern environmental movement is well told by Paul Sabin in The Bet.2 The Bet has lessons for today's debate over climate change and should serve as a cautionary tale for activists on either side.The Bet recounts the rivalry between Paul Ehrlich, the biologist who wrote The Population Bomb 3 in 1968, and Julian Simon, an economist who wrote The Ultimate Resource4 in 1981. Ehrlich warned of the dangers of overpopulation and the destruction of the planet while Simon celebrated population growth and the ingenuity that enables humans to adapt to changing circumstances. Ehrlich relied on the simple logic that resources are finite, claiming that increased population would lead to mass starvation. Notwithstanding his doomsday message, he was immensely popular and appeared on The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson more than twenty times during the 1970s.5 Tempering that image, Sabin points out that early in his career Ehrlich and his allies called for the United States to refuse to send food to certain famine stricken countries because they had failed to adopt population control policies.6 Further, Ehrlich struggled to completely disassociate his group, Zero Population Growth, from the groups that promoted eugenics.7 Nonetheless, while Ehrlich's popularity soared, Simon liked to joke he would be lucky if five people showed up to hear his ideas about how human beings and their innovative abilities are our ultimate resource.8But Simon persisted, and in 1981 wrote an article in Social Science Quarterly that, referring to Ehrlich, began with the question: \"How often does a prophet have to be wrong before we no longer believe that he or she is a true prophet?\"9 He then challenged Ehrlich to a bet: Ehrlich could choose any five metals and Simon would bet him that those metals would be less expensive in ten years then they were at that time.10 \"Ehrlich took the bait,\" saying that he would accept Simon's \"'astonishing offer before other greedy people jump in.'\"11 Ehrlich consulted with two of his scientist friends and chose five: chromium, copper, nickel, tin, and tungsten.12 They seemed like good choices as each had a critical role and its price had increased significantly during the 1970s.13Ten years later the world's population had increased by 800 million people, and the price of each of the metals had decreased.14 Simon had won the bet.15 Ehrlich sent a check to Simon with no accompanying letter but continued to be dismissive toward Simon.16 Simon, he went on to say, \"is like the guy who jumps off the Empire State Building and says how great things are going so far as he passes the 10th floor.\"17 As Sabin explains, Ehrlich had good reason for believing himself the unlucky victim of bad timing. Recessions during the 1980s had depressed commodity prices and when economists \"ran simulations for every ten-year period between 1900 and 2008, they found that Ehrlich would have won the bet 63[%] of the time.\" 18But having said that, Sabin argues that Ehrlich missed a fundamental point regarding \"how economic systems could work to manage scarcity, drive investment and innovation, and avert shortages.\"19 Taking just one metal as an example, there was a \"copper fever\" in the 1970s as copper prices surged as a consequence of political and labor strife in the primary producing countries at that time-Chile, Zaire, and Zambia. …","PeriodicalId":359296,"journal":{"name":"The Energy Law Journal","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"38","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Bet: Paul Ehrlich, Julian Simon, and Our Gamble over Earth's Future\",\"authors\":\"Richard B. Miller\",\"doi\":\"10.5860/choice.51-3963\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"THE BET: PAUL EHRLICH, JULIAN SIMON, AND OUR GAMBLE OVER EARTH'S FUTUREBy Paul Sabin, Yale University Press 2013It seems a matter of common sense that infinite resources do not exist, and we should, therefore, use our resources carefully. But it is a mistake to understate the impact of human ingenuity and market economics on the demand for resources we are inclined to think of as essential. This more complex truth was well understood by the Saudi Arabian oil minister, Sheikh Zaki Yamani, who famously stated that \\\"[the] Stone Age did not end for lack of stone, and the Oil Age will end long before the world runs out of oil.\\\"1 The story of this more complex truth about resource scarcity and its relationship to the modern environmental movement is well told by Paul Sabin in The Bet.2 The Bet has lessons for today's debate over climate change and should serve as a cautionary tale for activists on either side.The Bet recounts the rivalry between Paul Ehrlich, the biologist who wrote The Population Bomb 3 in 1968, and Julian Simon, an economist who wrote The Ultimate Resource4 in 1981. Ehrlich warned of the dangers of overpopulation and the destruction of the planet while Simon celebrated population growth and the ingenuity that enables humans to adapt to changing circumstances. Ehrlich relied on the simple logic that resources are finite, claiming that increased population would lead to mass starvation. Notwithstanding his doomsday message, he was immensely popular and appeared on The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson more than twenty times during the 1970s.5 Tempering that image, Sabin points out that early in his career Ehrlich and his allies called for the United States to refuse to send food to certain famine stricken countries because they had failed to adopt population control policies.6 Further, Ehrlich struggled to completely disassociate his group, Zero Population Growth, from the groups that promoted eugenics.7 Nonetheless, while Ehrlich's popularity soared, Simon liked to joke he would be lucky if five people showed up to hear his ideas about how human beings and their innovative abilities are our ultimate resource.8But Simon persisted, and in 1981 wrote an article in Social Science Quarterly that, referring to Ehrlich, began with the question: \\\"How often does a prophet have to be wrong before we no longer believe that he or she is a true prophet?\\\"9 He then challenged Ehrlich to a bet: Ehrlich could choose any five metals and Simon would bet him that those metals would be less expensive in ten years then they were at that time.10 \\\"Ehrlich took the bait,\\\" saying that he would accept Simon's \\\"'astonishing offer before other greedy people jump in.'\\\"11 Ehrlich consulted with two of his scientist friends and chose five: chromium, copper, nickel, tin, and tungsten.12 They seemed like good choices as each had a critical role and its price had increased significantly during the 1970s.13Ten years later the world's population had increased by 800 million people, and the price of each of the metals had decreased.14 Simon had won the bet.15 Ehrlich sent a check to Simon with no accompanying letter but continued to be dismissive toward Simon.16 Simon, he went on to say, \\\"is like the guy who jumps off the Empire State Building and says how great things are going so far as he passes the 10th floor.\\\"17 As Sabin explains, Ehrlich had good reason for believing himself the unlucky victim of bad timing. Recessions during the 1980s had depressed commodity prices and when economists \\\"ran simulations for every ten-year period between 1900 and 2008, they found that Ehrlich would have won the bet 63[%] of the time.\\\" 18But having said that, Sabin argues that Ehrlich missed a fundamental point regarding \\\"how economic systems could work to manage scarcity, drive investment and innovation, and avert shortages.\\\"19 Taking just one metal as an example, there was a \\\"copper fever\\\" in the 1970s as copper prices surged as a consequence of political and labor strife in the primary producing countries at that time-Chile, Zaire, and Zambia. …\",\"PeriodicalId\":359296,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Energy Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"38\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Energy Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.51-3963\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Energy Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.51-3963","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 38

摘要

《赌注:保罗·埃利希、朱利安·西蒙和我们对地球未来的赌博》作者:保罗·萨宾,耶鲁大学出版社2013年这似乎是一个常识问题,即不存在无限的资源,因此,我们应该谨慎使用我们的资源。但低估人类智慧和市场经济对我们倾向于认为必不可少的资源需求的影响是错误的。沙特阿拉伯石油部长谢赫·扎基·亚马尼(Sheikh Zaki Yamani)很好地理解了这个更复杂的事实,他说过一句著名的话:“石器时代不是因为缺乏石头而结束的,石油时代将在世界耗尽石油之前很久结束。”保罗·萨宾在《The Bet》一书中很好地讲述了这个关于资源稀缺及其与现代环境运动之间关系的更复杂的真相。《The Bet》对今天关于气候变化的辩论有借鉴意义,也应该成为双方活动人士的警世故事。这本书讲述了1968年写了《人口炸弹》的生物学家保罗·埃利希和1981年写了《终极资源》的经济学家朱利安·西蒙之间的竞争。埃利希警告了人口过剩和地球毁灭的危险,而西蒙则颂扬了人口增长和人类适应不断变化的环境的聪明才智。埃利希基于资源是有限的这一简单逻辑,声称人口增长将导致大规模饥荒。尽管他说的是世界末日的预言,但他还是非常受欢迎,在20世纪70年代与约翰尼·卡森一起上了20多次《今夜秀》为了缓和这种印象,萨宾指出,在他职业生涯的早期,埃利希和他的盟友曾呼吁美国拒绝向某些遭受饥荒的国家运送食物,因为这些国家未能采取人口控制政策此外,埃利希努力将他的“人口零增长”组织与提倡优生学的组织完全分离开来尽管如此,当埃利希的人气飙升时,西蒙喜欢开玩笑说,如果有五个人能听到他关于人类及其创新能力是我们最终资源的想法,那就太幸运了。但西蒙坚持了下来,并于1981年在《社会科学季刊》(Social Science Quarterly)上写了一篇文章,提到了埃利希,文章以这样一个问题开始:“一个先知到底要错多少次,我们才会不再相信他或她是一个真正的先知?”然后,他和埃利希打了一个赌:埃利希可以选择任何五种金属,西蒙和他打赌,这些金属在十年后会比现在便宜。“埃利希上钩了,”他说,在其他贪婪的人加入之前,他会接受西蒙“惊人的出价”。’”埃利希咨询了他的两位科学家朋友,选择了五种:铬、铜、镍、锡和钨它们似乎都是不错的选择,因为每一种都发挥着关键作用,而且它们的价格在20世纪70年代大幅上涨。10年后,世界人口增加了8亿,而每种金属的价格都下降了西蒙赢了打赌埃利希给西蒙寄了一张支票,但没有附上信,但仍然对西蒙不屑一顾。16他接着说,西蒙“就像一个从帝国大厦跳下的人,当他越过10楼时,还在说事情有多好。”正如萨宾解释的那样,埃利希有充分的理由相信自己是糟糕时机的不幸受害者。20世纪80年代的经济衰退压低了商品价格,当经济学家“对1900年至2008年的每一个十年周期进行模拟时,他们发现埃利希在63%的时间里会赢。”尽管如此,萨宾认为埃利希忽略了一个基本点,即“经济体系如何能够管理稀缺性,推动投资和创新,避免短缺”。仅以一种金属为例,20世纪70年代出现了一场“铜热”,当时主要生产国智利、扎伊尔和赞比亚的政治和劳工冲突导致铜价飙升。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Bet: Paul Ehrlich, Julian Simon, and Our Gamble over Earth's Future
THE BET: PAUL EHRLICH, JULIAN SIMON, AND OUR GAMBLE OVER EARTH'S FUTUREBy Paul Sabin, Yale University Press 2013It seems a matter of common sense that infinite resources do not exist, and we should, therefore, use our resources carefully. But it is a mistake to understate the impact of human ingenuity and market economics on the demand for resources we are inclined to think of as essential. This more complex truth was well understood by the Saudi Arabian oil minister, Sheikh Zaki Yamani, who famously stated that "[the] Stone Age did not end for lack of stone, and the Oil Age will end long before the world runs out of oil."1 The story of this more complex truth about resource scarcity and its relationship to the modern environmental movement is well told by Paul Sabin in The Bet.2 The Bet has lessons for today's debate over climate change and should serve as a cautionary tale for activists on either side.The Bet recounts the rivalry between Paul Ehrlich, the biologist who wrote The Population Bomb 3 in 1968, and Julian Simon, an economist who wrote The Ultimate Resource4 in 1981. Ehrlich warned of the dangers of overpopulation and the destruction of the planet while Simon celebrated population growth and the ingenuity that enables humans to adapt to changing circumstances. Ehrlich relied on the simple logic that resources are finite, claiming that increased population would lead to mass starvation. Notwithstanding his doomsday message, he was immensely popular and appeared on The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson more than twenty times during the 1970s.5 Tempering that image, Sabin points out that early in his career Ehrlich and his allies called for the United States to refuse to send food to certain famine stricken countries because they had failed to adopt population control policies.6 Further, Ehrlich struggled to completely disassociate his group, Zero Population Growth, from the groups that promoted eugenics.7 Nonetheless, while Ehrlich's popularity soared, Simon liked to joke he would be lucky if five people showed up to hear his ideas about how human beings and their innovative abilities are our ultimate resource.8But Simon persisted, and in 1981 wrote an article in Social Science Quarterly that, referring to Ehrlich, began with the question: "How often does a prophet have to be wrong before we no longer believe that he or she is a true prophet?"9 He then challenged Ehrlich to a bet: Ehrlich could choose any five metals and Simon would bet him that those metals would be less expensive in ten years then they were at that time.10 "Ehrlich took the bait," saying that he would accept Simon's "'astonishing offer before other greedy people jump in.'"11 Ehrlich consulted with two of his scientist friends and chose five: chromium, copper, nickel, tin, and tungsten.12 They seemed like good choices as each had a critical role and its price had increased significantly during the 1970s.13Ten years later the world's population had increased by 800 million people, and the price of each of the metals had decreased.14 Simon had won the bet.15 Ehrlich sent a check to Simon with no accompanying letter but continued to be dismissive toward Simon.16 Simon, he went on to say, "is like the guy who jumps off the Empire State Building and says how great things are going so far as he passes the 10th floor."17 As Sabin explains, Ehrlich had good reason for believing himself the unlucky victim of bad timing. Recessions during the 1980s had depressed commodity prices and when economists "ran simulations for every ten-year period between 1900 and 2008, they found that Ehrlich would have won the bet 63[%] of the time." 18But having said that, Sabin argues that Ehrlich missed a fundamental point regarding "how economic systems could work to manage scarcity, drive investment and innovation, and avert shortages."19 Taking just one metal as an example, there was a "copper fever" in the 1970s as copper prices surged as a consequence of political and labor strife in the primary producing countries at that time-Chile, Zaire, and Zambia. …
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Distributed Energy Resource Participation in Wholesale Markets: Lessons from the California ISO Private Empire: Exxonmobil and American Power LONG-TERM LIABILITY FOR CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE IN DEPLETED NORTH AMERICAN OIL AND GAS RESERVOIRS A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS The Bet: Paul Ehrlich, Julian Simon, and Our Gamble over Earth's Future The Quest: Energy, Security, and the Remaking of the Modern World
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1