Thanks for your explanation Onix. It seems we have more in common than I expected.

I guess the most fundamental difference between us is that you would undo creation if possible, whereas I would not.

There is still a deeply circular issue with your argument as I see it.

On the one hand, you say it is important to improve our condition. But on the other hand, you say it is not important to perpetuate our existence through “progress”, merely a distraction from improving our condition.

There is value in considering this possibility. It is certainly true that societies in general have tunnel vision and tend to focus on perpetuation and power rather than using that power for the direct benefit of citizens.

But doesn't furthering our ability to perpetuate drive the improvement of our condition, and vice versa? On a massive timescale, low quality of life translates directly to low survival, which is undesirable.

In the efforts of progress to make the rich richer and centralize power, many overwhelming benefits have arisen. For instance, civilization as opposed to a state of nature, leading to a reduction in violence. Or the invention of antibiotics. Or the recent democratization of information, to which you and I presently owe the benefit of this conversation.

Besides, what gives you the authority to project your viewpoint onto oppressed peoples throughout history? Claiming that they are so miserable that all humanity would be better off dead? (Reminds me of “the repugnant conclusion” as a conservative rejection of utilitarianism.) That’s an insult to the lower classes that could come only from the arrogance of a presumed techno/merito-cratic ruler, or alternately just a self-named prophet.

Not to say I would claim the authority to demand gratitude of all human beings for creation, or even expect them to agree with me on the good of creation. That would be both evil and stupid. Gratitude is my personal truth, a truth of the privileged, and of whoever else desires to claim it.

I only argue with you here, Onix, because in my mind you fall into a class of people similar to myself.

Side notes:

I am very glad to hear your opinion on cynicism and nihilism. Well said.

I also agree with you on CO2 emissions. In the long run, I think humans will need to learn to engineer emerging ecosystems such as fragmented forests in order to prevent their collapse and preserve services such as air and water quality control and social function. Japan is ahead of the curve with urban parks; they have had to be. I think sustainable energy will also become critical in the long run. But climate change itself is just another instance of the rich screwing the poor. Leave nature out of it, imbecilic leisure classes. And don’t imagine climate change can somehow be “stopped.”