Poll on human extinction

[Mint Floss]

Can't help but wonder what people here's opinions are on this.

 

[SergantWallbridge]

Unless you endorse moral realism, questions like this would need to include the part "better *for whom*". Personally I don't understand in what sense a certain state of the world could be better or worse in any meaningful way without the observer/experiencer.

 

[DTWAFavor]

Humanity is a burden to the planet in a lot of regards, I'd be glad for any other species to replace us

 

[Lost in a Nightmare]

I voted yes, but I think ALL life on Earth should go extinct, and not just humanity. Even if all humans vanished into nothingness TODAY, animals would still eat each other alive in nature. Natural disasters would continue to happen and the animals would suffer for it. The whole Earth just needs to be destroyed.

 

[tonicer]

There are plenty of really good humans on this planet who wouldn't hurt a fly but also a bunch of really really terrible humans who kill anything and anyone without any reason besides a voice in their head told them to do it or skydaddy. I vote to only remove those violent ones.

 

[Pluto]

 

[BrontesA]

I voted yes, but I think ALL life on Earth should go extinct, and not just humanity. Even if all humans vanished into nothingness TODAY, animals would still eat each other alive in nature. Natural disasters would continue to happen and the animals would suffer for it. The whole Earth just needs to be destroyed.

I disagree on the animal part, though it is interesting thinking. We humans differ from animals because of our will, and because of this will we have birthed atrocities and abominations onto this earth, without us (at this stage of development) things would be rolling on naturally. Whether it be disease or animal brutality, its never done for reasons we present for our own brutality, like 'it felt good' or the countless political or philosophical copes people give for atrocities. The little shred of optimism tells me that even full extinction would be a little too far. By optimism I mean: we could have genuinely created paradise for ourselves, but instead we chose what we have now. My idea of 'extinction' would entail wiping the slate fully in terms of infrastructure, but leaving a tiny fraction of people so they can start from scratch. Enough knowledge would have to be passed down to them in some way so that they know of our mistakes and how to avoid them, and the survivors would also probably need to be chosen for potential goodness, so we don't just allow the same evil morons that walk the earth today to do the exact same thing all over again. By 'from scratch', I mean straight up stone age revival, natural (though assisted by the ancestors (us) knowledge) progression that allows for development and warns against the most common pitfalls.
Very very wishful thinking, and not very well proposed cause I'm tired and don't feel like writing paragraphs, but this would be the only scenario where I would feel hopeful for humanity. Though, that's just the Anarcho-Primitivist in me talking.

There are plenty of really good humans on this planet who wouldn't hurt a fly but also a bunch of really really terrible humans who kill anything and anyone without any reason besides a voice in their head told them to do it or skydaddy. I vote to only remove those violent ones.

Issue is that every single one of us has the potential to be just as bad as the people you're talking about. You remove the 'violent' ones today, and tomorrow you'll just have the same amount cause they're filling the power vacuum. If anything, the next generation of violent people would be more impotent because their predecessors needed to be removed for them to rise up in the first place. But regardless, violent tendency isn't the only factor that should mark someone for 'taking out', there are psychopaths that probably haven't lifted a finger against another human that have caused immesurable damage anyway (think CEOs and politicians, ETC).

I'm not saying you're wrong though! This just felt like an interesting argument for me to engage with.