The arguments of Smail and Brown are a little far-fetched but could inevitability be the truth. Smail feels that if the growth of the population continues it will be detrimental to the population as a whole. He feels if the population growth is not declined it will plague humanity; he also says the population can only support 2 to 3 billion range to be adequate and the most comfortable for survival. Whereas Brown feels how we organize our lives and how we see the planet is what supports our livelihoods. Global warming is in the news constantly providing evidence to back up their claim of disaster. Global warming issues are serious issues involving all we are and have. The weather controls everything about us.
             Human society today is in trouble, with the abundance of people, the weather issues, and all the other problems we face with natural resources. We are in trouble. Societies have not done enough to preserve what we have. Society as a whole has used up a large number of our resources without thought of how to replace them. Now we are not able to replace the valuable resources we have used. Material growth and increased desire for material goods within our society cause us to depend on material things to survive on. If our material wealth runs out, we seem to forget how to live without it. I think Durkheim thought it would be dangerous for us to depend on the material things in life without preserving the natural. She feels this could cause a high suicide rate when people are overwhelmed by not having the material things they were used to.
             The trends of lower teen pregnancy, divorce, and crime rates are I feel terribly wrong. The data for the rates in years past have proved not to be always true. In 1995 82 % of the one parent families was headed by single parents, this is a very high number. If it has gone down, it had to have gone down a very low percentage. Divorce rates in 1992 were 12% this was based on th...