It might be said that continual blind growth is the philosophy of the cancer cell.
The entire rationale of our economy is that continued economic growth and expansion of economic activity increases quality of life and standard of living. Everyone gets better off as the economy expands.
But what's the end goal? Are we any happier? Is life better now that we're more affluent? If life's getting better, why are we working harder and harder and longer and longer? Are we just flying blind, expanding and consuming and wasting like a cancer without ever asking why we keep expanding and if it's making our lives better?
Then there's the environmental angle. Traditional conceptions of economic activity have it occurring in a vacuum, but we now conceive of all economic activity as occurring within the broader environment, and we now realise that our economic activity comes at the cost of resource consumption (things moving from the environment into the economy) and waste and pollution and degredation (stuff moving back out of the economy into the environment... "externalities") So does resource depletion and environmental damage constitute a limit on growth? Obviously, increased material affluence means more materials being used, there must be an end-point after which there's nothing left... right?
No, we'll keep expanding and expanding. And when earth is full we'll go to dif planets.
Unless we consume ourselves back to the Dark Ages first, right?
Self destruction through war is the most likely outcome.