• Umbrias@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Willful extinction” is not a productive way to end climate change.

    You won’t convince people, so it’s DOA, but it’s also philosophically weak in the face of alternative views. Alternatives which also theoretically have humans in them and don’t obliterate the environment exist, meaning you are on the back foot here to justify an anthropocentric philosophy.

    “Why do you think people should exist?” Can be an interesting discussion, but as an argument it’s not a great one.

    • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You won’t convince people

      I don’t have to. Birth rates in the developed world are plummeting.

      And unless I’m mistaken, you are the one trying to convince people right now.

      • Umbrias@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Birth rates are plummeting to maintain what will probably be around 13 billion. That’s wildly distinct from willful extinction.

        I… What? You made a post saying people should do x, I responded. Yeah we’re both trying to convince people of a thing, I’m not sure I see how that is actually relevant.

    • sin_free_for_00_days@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You won’t convince people, so it’s DOA

      That pretty much sums up any approach by humans to do something about what’s happening to the planet. Anything anyone throws out is realistically DOA.

      • Umbrias@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Maybe. I think sometimes we get disillusioned because incremental progress is hard to feel in the face of systemic momentum, but things are getting better. Often in ways that are far less …genocidey… Than willful extinction.