• KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      You stated very clearly “I honestly think that the best thing that could happen, overall, is humanity killing ourselves off.” That is a judgment and strangely a “belief” you have self-proclaimed and are now obfuscating.

      The two statements that I made, both of which I stand behind, are:

      I am not religious, but I honestly think that the best thing that could happen, overall, is humanity killing ourselves off. We’re a net negative for almost everything else on this planet.

      […]I feel that as far as the rest of the planet is concerned, the harm we’re causing out-weigh the positives we bring. That’s all my view is stating - there’s no ‘judging’ or claims that we deserve extinction.

      I believe that, from the perspective of the rest of the planet, or the planet’s population as a whole, the best thing that could happen would be us killing ourselves off, yes. That makes no claim that we ‘deserve’ extinction, or that we do not. It’s merely a statement that, as a whole, we cause more problems than we fix. They’d almost all be better off without us.

      You’re making a bit of a strawman out of me. I never stated that we didn’t have responsibilities to be a custodian.

      I was perhaps misinterpreting your comment that

      Our “comfort” does matter most beacasue we are the only ones who know enough to possibly change that.

      And if so, then I apologize.

      But based on our trajectory are a species, the evidence shows that we will overcome this period and move forward with the preservation of other species and our own.

      Are you making this statement based on the fact that we’re still around, and therefore have overcome every other period of hardship we’ve faced (as a species)? With the state of climate change and global warming where it is, we’re moving into unprecedented territory; if we’re basing this statement on our trajectory as a species, I would argue that evidence shows that we’ll continue doing too little until it’s too late. I hope that proves incorrect.

      […]unless a person with the belief that we should all die presses the red button of nuclear annihilation […] The belief that humanity should end is the issue… exactly what the religious people in the article are gunning for.

      Yes, and I think I very clearly stated that I disagree with their stance:

      The difference is that I, and all - or at least, the vast majority - of the folks you refer to aren’t actively trying to make it happen.

      Believing the world would be better off if something were to happen is not the same as actively hoping it does happen or working to make it happen. (Since we’re throwing around logical fallacies, that would be a false equivalence).

        • KoboldCoterie@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That would be true, except for the simple fact that, just because I think it would be the best outcome for the planet as a whole, doesn’t mean I have to be working towards it. From the perspective of everything else living here, it would be best if we all died. If we don’t, it’s increasingly likely that we take some or all of them with us when we do.