NY Times Suggests Eradication of All Humans Not a Bad Thing

Nov 2018
8,569
2,873
Maryland
NY Times Suggests Eradication of All Humans Not a Bad Thing—Because “Climate Change”
Would our planet be better if all humans were wiped off the face of the Earth? NY Times ponders how that is not such a bad idea.
By
The Free Thought Project
-
December 25, 2018


X






(MICHAEL SNYDER)—Would our planet be better off if humanity ceased to exist? That is quite a morbid question, but today an increasing number of intellectuals are bringing it up, because they are convinced that we are the source of everything that is wrong with our world. According to these zealots, humans are the primary source of climate change and if we do not alter our course the planet will be destroyed. But since humanity apparently lacks the will to end the behaviors which are destroying the planet, many of them also believe that it would be a good thing if we were to be completely wiped out somehow. Most normal people would never think this way, but these are the sorts of discussions that intellectuals and elitists are now having all the time, and sometimes this bleeds over into the mainstream media. For example, the New York Times just published a very long article by Clemson University professor of philosophy Todd May entitled “Would Human Extinction Be a Tragedy?” The following is a brief excerpt from that article…
To make that case, let me start with a claim that I think will be at once depressing and, upon reflection, uncontroversial. Human beings are destroying large parts of the inhabitable earth and causing unimaginable suffering to many of the animals that inhabit it. This is happening through at least three means. First, human contribution to climate change is devastating ecosystems, as the recent article on Yellowstone Park in The Times exemplifies. Second, increasing human population is encroaching on ecosystems that would otherwise be intact. Third, factory farming fosters the creation of millions upon millions of animals for whom it offers nothing but suffering and misery before slaughtering them in often barbaric ways. There is no reason to think that those practices are going to diminish any time soon. Quite the opposite.
Humanity, then, is the source of devastation of the lives of conscious animals on a scale that is difficult to comprehend.​

NY Times Suggests Eradication of All Humans Not a Bad Thing—Because "Climate Change"
 
Nov 2018
8,569
2,873
Maryland
Another left-wing wacko idea. But, who knows, a few years from now, the left will promote killing off humans as a way to "save" the planet.

Perhaps, the people who promote this idea, would be the first to sacrifice themselves, for the good of all mankind.
 

Lunchboxxy

Moderator
Apr 2010
21,322
26,021
Oregon
Lol. They aren’t wrong. Humans are without question destroying the planet. We have a negative impact on every species that isn’t us. Are you guys somehow implying that humans aren’t fucking up the planet?

Geez. What kinda snowflake would get upset about this. It was published by a philosophy professor in the opinion section. It is an interesting philosophical question.

And if you read the actual NYT article, and not just an article about the article which is weird in itself, you would see the professor said that in would be both a tragedy and a good thing if humans ceased to exist. And climate change isn’t the only reason.

It’s actually a pretty good read for those interested in the actual article
Opinion | Would Human Extinction Be a Tragedy?
 

Lunchboxxy

Moderator
Apr 2010
21,322
26,021
Oregon
Do you guys just not know what philosophy is?

I guess that’s not too surprising since conservatives hate imagination. Things or people who dare to be different are “others” and they are bad.

Also, the article isn’t calling for human eradication. For fucks sake maybe try reading while you’re googling what philosophy is
 
Jul 2011
82,407
48,001
Memphis, Tn.
Another left-wing wacko idea. But, who knows, a few years from now, the left will promote killing off humans as a way to "save" the planet.

Perhaps, the people who promote this idea, would be the first to sacrifice themselves, for the good of all mankind.
No, NOT of the "good of mankind" but for the good of the health of the planet. Homo Sapiens are just one of the many species of mammals that lives on this planet we call Earth.
You can't even understand your own posts.
Sad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OldGaffer
Sep 2007
23,397
16,310
N48 51.489 E2 17.67119
Another left-wing wacko idea. But, who knows, a few years from now, the left will promote killing off humans as a way to "save" the planet.

Perhaps, the people who promote this idea, would be the first to sacrifice themselves, for the good of all mankind.
Naw, lets just keep dumping petroleum, heavy metals and plastics into rivers, lakes and oceans. That only harms wildlife, there's no harm to humans with that.
 
Jan 2016
57,388
54,210
Colorado
I came across this while reading the article: the truth is that our planet could easily support a human population that was twice as large if our resources were managed properly and new technologies which already exist were allowed to flourish.

I'm sorry. That is an extraordinarily dubious claim. Doubling the current population of ~7.7 billion would mean 15.4 billion human beings on this planet. Terrible things would start to happen long before we reached that point. And it is frankly absurd to suppose that our resources WOULD be managed properly. That would only occur if humans were perfectly rational and human societies were living in perfect harmony with each other around the world.

Uh, is that what you see around you?!?
 
Jan 2014
16,568
6,382
south
an interesting article. just think of the implications. kinda drastic - but effective - way to resolve all kinds of human faults.