WHITE OR YMCA OR WASP AUSTRALIANS 1801-2099 ......THEY FAILED TO ADAPT TO CHANGING CONDITIONS....ANIMATED MODELS OF DEMOGRAPHIC AND PORNOGRAPHIC CHANGE DOCTOR STRANGE The demographic transition is the change in the human condition from high mortality and high fertility to low mortality and low fertility. Death is THE FUTURE OF LOW FERTILITY CULTURAL HERITAGE C'EST ÇA DERRIÈRE LES MOTS A theory of population theory Thomas K. Burch ne of the problems with the theory of demographic transition is that we have never quite agreed on precisely what it is (McNicoll, 1992). In keeping with what has gone before, I would suggest that there are two kinds of transition theory. The phenomenological version simply states that a large, sustained decline in mortality will be followed after some time lag by a large, sustained decline in fertility, resulting in an intervening period of rapid population growth. A more fundamental version would include the determinants of mortality and fertility decline – modernisation, economic growth, secularisation/individualisation, technological developments in medicine and fertility control, and so forth

A AUSTRÁLIA E A EUROPA E OS U.S. OF A AND THE CANADIAN SHIELD TÊM NECESSIDADE DE TRABALHADORES BRAÇAIS OU DE MONÓTONOS E REPETITIVOS TRABALHOS VAGOS NOS SERVIÇOS MAL PAGOS COM MIL POBRES DIABOS QUE COMEM ARROZ COM QUIABOS E RARAMENTE FICAM BRABOS DE TÉCNICOS A BAIXO PREÇO ACOLHEM COM APREÇO QUEREM UMA CLASSE MÉDIA MUITO BAIXA D'IMPORTAÇÃO POIS ENTÃO
Much of formal demography (techniques, methods) can be viewed also as

theory, that is, as a collection of substantive models about how populations and cohorts

behave;

b) Many ideas from behavioural demography that have been rejected as

empirically false or too simplistic can be viewed as perfectly good theory, especially if

they were to be stated more rigorously.

Indeed, at the theoretical level, the classic distinction between formal and

behavioural demography loses much of its force. In both sub-areas of demography,

theoretical models have essentially the same epistemological standing, even if they may

differ on other dimensions such as scope and complexity, and even if different kinds of

day-to-day work may be involved in their development and use.

I recognise that the word

theory

is ambiguous in the non-pejorative sense of

‘having two or more meanings.’ It means different things to different people, both in

everyday speech and in scientific discourse. In such circumstances, it is futile to try to

establish the ‘correct’ definition or the ‘true meaning’ of theory. But it is possible and

useful to suggest a new – though certainly not entirely new -- approach to theory that

might prove more fruitful than the older ideas to which many of us are accustomed. In

the next section, I summarise the main elements of the model-based view, noting some

ways in which it differs from, but also agrees with, logical empiricism. A key part of

this exposition is a partial re-definition of such terms as

model

and

theory.

But

terminology is not crucial, and some may want to define these words differently, and to

preserve a sharp distinction between

theory

and

model.

The central ideas I wish to

convey are an emphasis on formal demography as substantive knowledge, and a plea

that empirical exceptions to otherwise useful behavioural theories should not lead to

their discard.

In the logical empiricist view of science, theory comes from data through a process

of induction and generalisation. Theoretical knowledge and empirical knowledge are

seen as occupying different but parallel planes, layered upward into ever more general

and abstract propositions. In the model-based view, theory and empirical studies are

seen as occupying non-parallel planes. The planes must intersect, of course, since we

are discussing empirical science. But the origin and character of the two kinds of

knowledge are qualitatively different