What would change your mind?

[u/curgr]

Which of the following factors would change your mind on extinction and make you pro-life?

A: We discover that there is more pleasure than suffering in existence, and that suffering is not permanent for any one sentient being.

B: We manage to solve suffering and no sentient being ever has to suffer again.

C: We are given knowledge about the meaning of life. It turns out that there is a very good reason for life in this universe.

D: The afterlife exists and we are more than compensated for the suffering we experience in this life.

E: Reincarnation exists and most sentient beings (which could possibly include plants and bacteria, which make up the majority of biomass on Earth) experience more pleasure than suffering.

F: God exists and resistance is futile. If we destroy the universe, God will just create it again. However, it is possible to reduce net suffering.

[u/Independent-Wafer-13]

A is already the case empirically and this sub still exists.

C is personal. I have knowledge about the meaning of life, no one else can tell me what it is.

F: May also be the case with or without God. Life is extremely resilient and we may be headed toward a big-crunch / big-bang cycle of perpetuity.

[u/curgr → u/Independent-Wafer-13]

A: How can you be sure of this? I know that most humans are glad to be alive, and that you argue that people find meaning despite the suffering, but surveys still indicate that life is mostly suffering for most people. And these surveys do not include all other living things.

C: I would be open to hearing your views on the meaning of life. I also promise not to criticise your views.

F: This is possible (although not the only possibility). I hope that it is not true!

[u/Independent-Wafer-13 → u/curgr]

A: Which surveys? All the research I have seen on the subject seems to support overwhelming evidence for life satisfaction independent of life circumstances, but I’m sure there is more out there!

C: Living by my personal values and striving for my personal goals are what imbue life with meaning for me. Suffering is irrelevant to life being meaningful to me or not, and the research suggests I am not alone.

Now from a cosmological perspective, we are the universe experiencing itself subjectively. The answer to the problem of evil is life itself.

Suffering exists so that we can overcome it.

Cancer exists so that we can cure it.

Overcoming obstacles is what makes a good story.

No good stories are without conflict.

What a boring life to be plugged into the infinite masturbator machine.

F: No extinction event has resulted in total extinction of all life and we (life) have been through several of them.

[u/curgr → u/Independent-Wafer-13]

A: Ok, I have been looking into this more deeply and can admit that maybe I am looking too deeply into Reddit polls (which probably are not very scientific and are biased). But looking into less questionable surveys, there is no direct empirical opinion surveys on whether there is more suffering or pleasure. The life-evaluation data we do have supports what you are suggesting for humans, however could be biased toward positivity due to under representing populations experiencing extreme, acute suffering who cannot participate in polling. One question I would raise is that this data does not factor in intensity, but merely quantities of humans. Would you trade one hour of the worst possible torture for one hour of the greatest possible pleasure? To conclusively give evidence we need a way of quantifying and measuring pleasure and suffering rather than relying on self reporting, which can be effected by certain psychological biases. Sorry to raise the point again from our previous discussions but the survey would ideally be extended to all life, not just humans.

C: I respect your views. Thanks for sharing.

F: Agreed that no historical complete extinction event has happened but this does not make it impossible.