Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2017 19:50:42 GMT
WIKHuman intelligence was an evolutionary mistake that has casued immense harm to the planet. We should sterilise ourselves and cease inflicting damage upon the environment. I don't agree but I do find the idea of voluntary human extinction quite fascinating. We sometimes forget that the planet, the universe, existence in general would all quite happily go on without us.
|
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Jun 15, 2017 20:22:16 GMT
WIKHuman intelligence was an evolutionary mistake that has casued immense harm to the planet. We should sterilise ourselves and cease inflicting damage upon the environment. I don't agree but I do find the idea of voluntary human extinction quite fascinating. We sometimes forget that the planet, the universe, existence in general would all quite happily go on without us. Let's just let humanity see if it can avoid involuntary extinction. That's the evolutionary solution. In any case, the damage that humans have caused is short term in the grand scheme of things. It's only long term from a human perspective. If humans go extinct, a few million years should erase most of the human impact. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2017 20:54:19 GMT
If the "mistake" (I put that in air-quotes because evolution is supposed to be without design) is a natural event, there is nothing to stop it occurring once again here or on other worlds.
Incoming (or existing) faults can only be perceived and prevented by intentional agents. Without intentional agents there will be no one around to recognise or prevent them from (re)occurring.
|
|
|
|
Post by sugarbiscuits on Jun 16, 2017 8:17:18 GMT
I've read about him. Have you read his quotes on wikiquote?
I have also read about Arthur Schopenhauer and David Benatar, have you?
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,695
Likes: 1,331
|
Post by The Lost One on Jun 16, 2017 9:11:26 GMT
WIKHuman intelligence was an evolutionary mistake that has casued immense harm to the planet. We should sterilise ourselves and cease inflicting damage upon the environment. I don't agree but I do find the idea of voluntary human extinction quite fascinating. We sometimes forget that the planet, the universe, existence in general would all quite happily go on without us. But if humans die out, who's left to care about the flourishing environment? Animals maybe? Rabbits in Australia show how much animals care about the environment. |
|
|
|
Post by OldSamVimes on Jun 16, 2017 10:34:42 GMT
WIKHuman intelligence was an evolutionary mistake that has casued immense harm to the planet. We should sterilise ourselves and cease inflicting damage upon the environment. I don't agree but I do find the idea of voluntary human extinction quite fascinating. We sometimes forget that the planet, the universe, existence in general would all quite happily go on without us. But if humans die out, who's left to care about the flourishing environment? Animals maybe? Rabbits in Australia show how much animals care about the environment. Humans are killing the environment. That's the opposite of 'caring'. |
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,695
Likes: 1,331
|
Post by The Lost One on Jun 16, 2017 15:31:33 GMT
But if humans die out, who's left to care about the flourishing environment? Animals maybe? Rabbits in Australia show how much animals care about the environment. Humans are killing the environment. That's the opposite of 'caring'. What I mean is, it is humans (admittedly not all humans) that think the environment worth saving. Take away the humans and the environment just is. Even if it flourishes once humans are gone there will be no-one there to appreciate that flourishing. So what's the point. |
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Jun 16, 2017 16:26:38 GMT
Humans are killing the environment. That's the opposite of 'caring'. What I mean is, it is humans (admittedly not all humans) that think the environment worth saving. Take away the humans and the environment just is. Even if it flourishes once humans are gone there will be no-one there to appreciate that flourishing. So what's the point. I'm sure there are plenty of animals that appreciate a breath of fresh air or a gulp of fresh water, even if they aren't able to articulate it. |
|
PanLeo
Sophomore
@saoradh
Posts: 919
Likes: 53
|
Post by PanLeo on Jun 16, 2017 16:33:43 GMT
It would be best if all sentient life went extinct
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2017 21:43:23 GMT
If the "mistake" (I put that in air-quotes because evolution is supposed to be without design) is a natural event, there is nothing to stop it occurring once again here or on other worlds. Incoming (or existing) faults can only be perceived and prevented by intentional agents. Without intentional agents there will be no one around to recognise or prevent them from (re)occurring. There are those who posit that the best explanation for the Fermi paradox is that intelligence is not a natural part of evolution and as such, will not occur in the natural development of a planet's potential life-forms. The vast majority of life-forms on earth for example, have been evolving as long, if not longer than humans but intelligence has never been a natural part of their evolution. I think Zapffe is arguing that it's not just a mistake but is, in fact, a mistake that is disastrously unique to humanity. |
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,695
Likes: 1,331
|
Post by The Lost One on Jun 16, 2017 22:02:54 GMT
What I mean is, it is humans (admittedly not all humans) that think the environment worth saving. Take away the humans and the environment just is. Even if it flourishes once humans are gone there will be no-one there to appreciate that flourishing. So what's the point. I'm sure there are plenty of animals that appreciate a breath of fresh air or a gulp of fresh water, even if they aren't able to articulate it. But suppose all humans agree that the environment means so much to them that they wipe themselves out for its sake. That meaning dies with them. |
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Jun 16, 2017 23:41:02 GMT
I'm sure there are plenty of animals that appreciate a breath of fresh air or a gulp of fresh water, even if they aren't able to articulate it. But suppose all humans agree that the environment means so much to them that they wipe themselves out for its sake. That meaning dies with them. Well, what if all humans decided that they cared enough about the quality of life of other sentient creatures that they (we) were willing to make that sacrifice, for the benefit of our fellow creatures? Sort of like a hero giving his life so that others can live, but on a species level. I know this is a very unlikely supposition of a supposition of a supposition, starting with the idea that all humans could ever agree on anything, let alone collective extinction. And I of course am not on board with this idea! |
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,695
Likes: 1,331
|
Post by The Lost One on Jun 19, 2017 9:44:58 GMT
But suppose all humans agree that the environment means so much to them that they wipe themselves out for its sake. That meaning dies with them. Well, what if all humans decided that they cared enough about the quality of life of other sentient creatures that they (we) were willing to make that sacrifice, for the benefit of our fellow creatures? Sort of like a hero giving his life so that others can live, but on a species level. I know this is a very unlikely supposition of a supposition of a supposition, starting with the idea that all humans could ever agree on anything, let alone collective extinction. And I of course am not on board with this idea! True I guess, but I think only a very few people actually feel so strongly about the environment that they would actually countenance wiping out humanity for its sake. So Zapffe's idea is a bit of a non-starter. You have to already agree with his conclusion before you hear his argument if you know what I mean. |
|
