CMV: Environmental antinatalists draw a self-contradictory conclusion
I want to push back on environmental forms of antinatalism, specifically the idea that because humans are harmful to the Earth, humans should stop reproducing and eventually disappear. I think that given the premises they use to make this conclusion, a better conclusion is to keep existing.
If humans have caused large-scale harm to the planet, it isn’t obvious that extinction is the most moral response. An alternative is moral responsibility: reforming our behavior and actively repairing the damage we’ve caused. In most ethical contexts, we think it’s better for a harmful agent to change and make restitution than to simply remove themselves and leave the harm unaddressed.
To use an analogy: if you damage a friend’s house, leaving halfway through the destruction is better than finishing the job, but staying to clean up and repair the damage is better still. Humans are currently the only beings capable of intentionally restoring ecosystems at scale, so eliminating future generations also eliminates the possibility of long-term repair and stewardship.
This doesn’t address all forms of antinatalism (especially those focused on suffering or consent), but if the core concern is that huma
the framing does a lot of heavy lifting here and that’s what people are responding to Time will tell.
Reaction: Me_irl
From my side, this reads stronger on paper than in practice That’s what changes the context. We’ll see how people react over time.
I get the idea, this feels more about execution than intent and that tension shows up immediately That’s just my read on it.
From a practical angle, the signal is clear, the strategy less so and that’s the part people are stuck on That’s what changes the context. Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
Reaction: me_irl
this feels rushed rather than thought through which is why this is getting picked apart That part stands out. Feels like there’s more coming here.
Reaction: Take it off us, It burns us!!!
Stepping back, this depends heavily on what happens next That’s just my read on it.
From my side, there’s a lot said here but not much clarified Not convinced this is settled yet. That’s just my read on it.
At first glance, this solves one problem while creating another so the response doesn’t surprise me That part stands out.
this reads stronger on paper than in practice Curious how this plays out. That’s the impression it gives me.
there’s a lot said here but not much clarified
From my side, this comes across more reactive than planned Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
this reads stronger on paper than in practice which explains why reactions are split This could age very differently in a week. At least from my perspective.
From where I sit, this comes across more reactive than planned and that’s why opinions are all over the place That’s what makes this interesting. Time will tell. That’s the impression it gives me.
Not gonna lie, there’s a gap between the message and the outcome Hard to say where this lands long term.
this feels more about execution than intent and that’s where people will push back That’s what changes the context.
Bluntly speaking, the idea isn’t bad, but the delivery is doing damage which turns this into more of a debate That part stands out. Others will probably see it differently.
From the outside, the direction makes sense but the details are messy and that’s where people will push back That’s the key detail here. That’s just my read on it.
If you zoom out, the wording alone shifts how people read this which turns this into more of a debate That’s what changes the context. Let’s see what happens next. That’s the impression it gives me.
At this point, the way this is presented changes how it lands Time will tell. That’s just my read on it.
Reaction: me_irl
Real talk, this feels like a half-step, not a full move and that’s why this won’t land the same for everyone
this solves one problem while creating another so the response doesn’t surprise me Time will tell. That’s the impression it gives me.
Trying to be fair, the main issue seems to be how this is handled and that’s the part people are stuck on That’s what makes this interesting. That’s just how it reads to me.
Reaction: "I Can't Eat This!" ~Pig
Just reading this, the way this is presented changes how it lands which is why this is getting picked apart Feels like there’s more coming here. Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
If you zoom out, the main issue seems to be how this is handled That’s the key detail here. Not convinced this is settled yet.
Bluntly speaking, the way this is presented changes how it lands and that’s where people will push back That’s what changes the context. Feels like there’s more coming here.
At first glance, the way this is presented changes how it lands and that’s why opinions are all over the place Not convinced this is settled yet.
Reaction: They both have a serious jaw condition so it should be a fair fight
Real talk, the timing matters more than people admit and that tension shows up immediately Hard to say where this lands long term.
the direction makes sense but the details are messy and that’s why this won’t land the same for everyone That’s the key detail here. This could age very differently in a week.
Reaction: Take it off us, It burns us!!!
On the surface, this feels more about execution than intent Hard to say where this lands long term.
From a practical angle, this comes across more reactive than planned which is why this is getting picked apart This could age very differently in a week. That’s the impression it gives me.
At this point, the signal is clear, the strategy less so That part stands out. Hard to say where this lands long term. That’s just my read on it.
Reaction: This meme is brought to you by a lack of sleep
this depends heavily on what happens next That’s what makes this interesting. Could be wrong, but that’s how it comes across.
Stepping back, the idea isn’t bad, but the delivery is doing damage and that’s why opinions are all over the place That’s the key detail here. This could age very differently in a week.
On the surface, this feels like a half-step, not a full move which turns this into more of a debate Interested to see the follow-up.
Bluntly speaking, this feels rushed rather than thought through That’s what changes the context.
Putting bias aside, there’s a gap between the message and the outcome This probably isn’t the last word on it. At least from my perspective.
Reaction: Its been 3 years since I last saw morning
this feels more about execution than intent which is why this is getting picked apart That’s just my read on it.
Putting bias aside, this depends heavily on what happens next and that’s the part people are stuck on Interested to see the follow-up.
At first glance, the direction makes sense but the details are messy so the response doesn’t surprise me Not convinced this is settled yet. Others will probably see it differently.
Looking at this, the main issue seems to be how this is handled That’s what changes the context. This could age very differently in a week.
Reaction: me_irl
this solves one problem while creating another and that’s where people will push back That’s what makes this interesting. This could age very differently in a week. That’s the impression it gives me.
the follow-through is what will decide this so the response doesn’t surprise me Feels like an opening move, not an ending.
Trying to be fair, there’s a lot said here but not much clarified and that’s where it gets complicated That’s just how it reads to me.