Comment by This_Is_The_End on 25/01/2020 at 21:11 UTC

3 upvotes, 0 direct replies (showing 0)

View submission: Reductio: if we consider merely affecting the environment to be morally wrong, we face the conclusion that our existence is evil. This indicates we have made a mistake...

While the "article" is mentioning the issue with judging the existence of humanity on the base on a single issue, the author doesn't care about knowledge we already have. The Americas are are wonderful example how humankind were always a part of the ecosystem. By doing an extensive economy of gardening the ecosystems in all of the Americas were created, like the Amazons region. Aborigines in Australia were responsible for creating diverse ecosystems, by burning down parts of the landscape and thus preventing much larger firestorms. Meadows mowed only once a year at the right time are contributing to a richer ecosystem with more insects and birds. I could add to these examples a lot.

The simplistic categorizing into moral good and bad and trying to focus on an individual responsibility only, without taking into account the superstructure of a society is on the level of a religious zealot. When philosophy is debating on the level of first graders, philosophy should stick to the world of fantasy.

Replies

There's nothing here!