LogFAQs > #956309636

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, Database 8 ( 02.18.2021-09-28-2021 ), DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	I'm an anti-natalist.
Reigning_King 07/21/21 6:51:29 AM #102:	kind9 posted... This philosophy is based on subjective concepts(pleasure, pain, morality) and concepts that only have meaning to living humans. You say that as if most philosophies can't also be described that way, I'm not sure what your point is. kind9 posted... Say when humanity is all gone what have you done to prevent something like humanity from evolving again? How do you know evolution won't lead to more sapient beings? You want to wipe out all animals? Can you be sure that abiogenesis isn't happening all the time on earth? Given the age of the earth, life on earth, and the age/state of our sun it's actually very safe to assume that if humanity suddenly went extinct that nothing comperable would replace us. Regardless this philosophy is human focused as a matter of practicality. There very well might be sentient aliens suffering as we do but it isn't realistic or worthwhile to consider them given we don't know for sure if they exist and couldn't do anything to help them even if they did. The concerns you bring up are similarly beyond the scope of the idea except one point on animals that are breed by humans specifically as food since our extinction would put an end to that as a byproduct. kind9 posted... this is just edgelordism. Care to elaborate? I'm not advocating for mass killings or Thanos snaps here, I'm also not saying that life is unbearably horrible or that it isn't worth living (in most cases). Please tell me what's so edgy about my stance other than the fact that it is naturally unpopular. <cite>Reigning_King posted [p:956309636] in I'm an ant... [t:79573893]...</cite> <quote>kind9 posted... </cite> <quote>This philosophy is based on subjective concepts(pleasure, pain, morality) and concepts that only have meaning to living humans.</quote>You say that as if most philosophies can't also be described that way, I'm not sure what your point is. kind9 posted... </cite> <quote>Say when humanity is all gone what have you done to prevent something like humanity from evolving again? How do you know evolution won't lead to more sapient beings? You want to wipe out all animals? Can you be sure that abiogenesis isn't happening all the time on earth?</quote>Given the age of the earth, life on earth, and the age/state of our sun it's actually very safe to assume that if humanity suddenly went extinct that nothing comperable would replace us. Regardless this philosophy is human focused as a matter of practicality. There very well might be sentient aliens suffering as we do but it isn't realistic or worthwhile to consider them given we don't know for sure if they exist and couldn't do anything to help them even if they did. The concerns you bring up are similarly beyond the scope of the idea except one point on animals that are breed by humans specifically as food since our extinction would put an end to that as a byproduct. kind9 posted... </cite> <quote>this is just edgelordism.</quote>Care to elaborate? I'm not advocating for mass killings or Thanos snaps here, I'm also not saying that life is unbearably horrible or that it isn't worth living (in most cases). Please tell me what's so edgy about my stance other than the fact that it is naturally unpopular. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1