Antinatalism, the absence from procreation is often associated with the end goal of a sentient free or even lifeless world.
People like David Benatar argue, that creating life in the first place is ethically wrong. As such, the end result of this philosophy would be an earth without any (sentient) life on it.
Recently though, the amount of people not willing to have children is growing (https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-49298720).
Driven by considerations about climate change and resource consumption more and more young people question procreation.
Those mostly younger generations argue, that adding more humans onto this planet increase overall suffering and will worsen current developments such as climate change and/or the ongoing great extinction event, that kills whole species with each passing day.
Interestingly, the end goal of David Benatar would be worldwide extinction of any sentience and possibly any life, while the other group wants to preserve life -but int the end both rely on the means of antinatalism.
Or in short: antinatalism is compatible with saving/preserving life as well as ending it in order to spare sentient beings of suffering. At least as a means of reaching their eventual end goals.
No comments:
Post a Comment