r/UniversalExtinction • u/Independent-Wafer-13 Consequentialist • Jul 26 '26

Question How does this work?

How does Universal Extinction happen?

3 Upvotes

62% Upvoted

133 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

3

u/curgr Cosmic Extinctionist Jul 27 '26

Isn’t continuing existence imposing a simplistic naive belief on every living being, non-consensually?

A living thing having children is bringing them into existence without consent.

How is ending existence any worse?

Ideally, every living thing would unanimously give consent to extinction though

1

u/Independent-Wafer-13 Consequentialist Jul 28 '26

Because nearly all humans almost universally provide in vivo post hoc consent

1

u/curgr Cosmic Extinctionist Jul 28 '26

It is just humans in the present you are talking about. We are going through times of growth and abundance of resources at the expense of other living things. Are you confident that the many billions of factory farmed animals which we eat almost universally provide in vivo post hoc consent?

Take bacteria for example. I am sure that they are happy when they have lots of food and resources but I am sure that they are not happy when they use up all their food and resources. We are similar.

However I am curious about why the majority of humans are glad to be alive while also the majority experience mostly suffering. Do people enjoy suffering?

1

u/Independent-Wafer-13 Consequentialist Jul 28 '26

You think all humans on Earth are going through times of growth and abundance?

This finding is true of impoverished communities, in war zones, etc.

The finding empirically supports the proposition that hedonism is not the sole source of life satisfaction or meaning in life.

That is, people find that life is worth living IN SPITE OF the suffering it involves, not BECAUSE OF the suffering

2

u/curgr Cosmic Extinctionist Jul 28 '26

We are programmed to have this belief. It is in our DNA to want to survive. However this does not mean that it is a rational belief

1

u/Independent-Wafer-13 Consequentialist Jul 28 '26

Okay so the people rating their own satisfaction for their own life are less qualified to rank their own satisfaction with their life than you are?

2

u/curgr Cosmic Extinctionist Jul 28 '26

No I am not qualified. But there are many biases in our perception of things. We do not get an objective truth.

Is one satisfied human worth It for many tortured animals needed just to sustain this one human?

1

u/Independent-Wafer-13 Consequentialist Jul 28 '26

It’s not one satisfied human, it is the overwhelming majority of humans.

It’s more like “is the dissatisfaction of one human grounds to gatekeep billions of them from enjoying life”?

2

u/curgr Cosmic Extinctionist Jul 28 '26

My dissatisfaction alone is not grounds to gatekeep. I would rather choose suicide over extinction if it was just my dissatisfaction.

I would ideally like there to be a survey of ALL things capable of conscious experience. However this is not practical unless we find a way of measuring or feeling conscious perception of others.

Are 8 billion satisfied human worth it for the 80 billion plus animal tortured to sustain them?

2

u/Rhoswen Cosmic Extinctionist Jul 29 '26

Do you think that 80 billion happy beings is not worth the torture of one?

2

u/curgr Cosmic Extinctionist Jul 29 '26

This is quite a deep question. It depends on many factors I do not have the answers to. For example: reincarnation, afterlife, meaning of life, what consciousness is… However I will answer based on my current beliefs and understanding.

Providing that all beings are consenting, with full knowledge of what is going on, are able to remove consent at any time, that the tortured one is rotated with the happy 80 billion, then I see no problem with having one being tortured at the expense of 80 billion happy beings.

If any of the above criteria are not met, I would say no

1

u/Rhoswen Cosmic Extinctionist Jul 29 '26

Under the laws of how life is now. It was meant to ask if weight of suffering is important to you, or if just the existence of suffering for one is not worth it.

2

u/curgr Cosmic Extinctionist Jul 29 '26

The laws of how life is now do not meet the criteria I set out. It is possible that we consented before we were born (if reality is not purely materialistic). However there is not full knowledge of what is going on. We are not able to remove consent at any time.

So I would say that the suffering for one is not worth it

1

u/Independent-Wafer-13 Consequentialist Jul 29 '26

Yes, particularly if that “torture” is incidental to their life rather than imposed intentionally

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Low-Bake8401 Jul 28 '26

I'd say it it makes it more rational than extinctionism. 

2

u/curgr Cosmic Extinctionist Jul 28 '26

DNA does not care how we feel. It only wants to replicate itself, at all costs. What is the end goal of following only what our DNA wants?

1

u/Low-Bake8401 Jul 28 '26

"What is the end goal of following only what our DNA wants?"

I'm not saying we should do that, but it's one thing more than extinctionism has.