u/curgr

Warning: this is quite a depressing post.

If society collapses (maybe due to climate change disrupting food supplies, global war, running out of fossil fuels…) most humans and domesticated animals would likely starve and we would lose most modern comforts.

A question for pro-existence people: would you keep your belief that existence of the universe is desirable if society was to collapse, even if you were one of the starving?

A question for the extinctionists: do you believe that society will never collapse and that humans could eventually develop the technology to at least make life on Earth extinct?

My views: I am 70% sure that society will not collapse in the near future. If humanity makes it and we still have sufficient energy resources, we could eventually develop the technology to make all life on Earth extinct in a painless and peaceful way. However it is unlikely that we will develop and use it unless the extinction movement grows and becomes a majority.

Edit: minor clarifications.

Law 1: The pleasure or suffering of one being always tends toward a neutral level, unless acted on by a consequence. This law is basically describing the hedonic treadmill.

Law 2: F = mad, where F is the “force” of a consequence experienced by one being; m is the magnitude of consciousness the being has; a is the magnitude of an action; d is the “distance” the being is from the action. Currently not sure how to get a negative value for F though.

Law 3: For every action, there are always equal and opposite (positive and negative) consequences. For this to work properly it must be assumed that all living beings (including individual cells) have magnitude of consciousness greater than zero. Time must also be ignored so that the consequences are not all happening at once.

Newton’s third law of motion states that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. The same law could apply to the consequences of every action we make, over long periods of time.

Consequences are not limited to just humans. For this argument I am assuming that all living things have some level of conscious experience.

Which of the following factors would change your mind on extinction and make you pro-life?

A: We discover that there is more pleasure than suffering in existence, and that suffering is not permanent for any one sentient being.

B: We manage to solve suffering and no sentient being ever has to suffer again.

C: We are given knowledge about the meaning of life. It turns out that there is a very good reason for life in this universe.

D: The afterlife exists and we are more than compensated for the suffering we experience in this life.

E: Reincarnation exists and most sentient beings (which could possibly include plants and bacteria, which make up the majority of biomass on Earth) experience more pleasure than suffering.

F: God exists and resistance is futile. If we destroy the universe, God will just create it again. However, it is possible to reduce net suffering.

View Poll

The one thing I know for certain (my own consciousness) is one thing which science will never be able to explain.

My consciousness seems to be undefinable, unmeasurable and unexplainable, and yet it is all I experience. For something to be scientifically explained, surely it needs to be observable to others and measurable.

This could mean the following:

1. Consciousness is not of the physical universe so materialistic views of it arising purely from the brain are not correct.

2. The scientific method is flawed and all scientific understanding could be wrong. This includes evolution and the big bang. 1 + 1 may not equal 2 outside of the physical universe.

3. All my beliefs and memories may be wrong.