Would you save humanity?

Post Reply New Topic

Imagine, in a fictitious and strictly hypothetical scenario, that there is a virus that will cause the complete extinction of humans while doing no harm to any other species. And imagine that, for whatever reason, you are the only scientist in the world capable of curing this virus and saving humanity from extinction. Question is: would you save humanity or let go extinct?

We have been reminded time and time again by the few in power that no one is under any legal obligation to help another in need simply because they possess the means to do so, so let's assume that same principle applies here as well.

Given that humans are vile beings, full of racism, bigotry, and hatred for everyone else; that humans are sadistic cruel to other humans as well every other living thing on this planet; that humans are causing major extinctions and destroying the entire planet for nothing more than petty short term financial profits; would you save a species that has never done anything but belittle and abuse you, or would you just let them all die?

Yes.

There's a word I've heard often: inhuman. This word is often used to describe atrocities, violence, and sadism. But I never understood why. There is nothing about these acts that is contrary to human nature; history attests to such behaviors being the norm for humans. They are, in fact, very "human".

Even when we encounter someone who offers us empathy or compassion, it is almost always the case that they revealed to be wolves in sheep's clothing; manipulating us for their own ends. Whether that is being groomed by a sexual predator, getting set up as a scapegoat to blamed for their crimes, manipulating us to access something in our possession, or simply using us to make themselves look good. There is always some hidden sinister ulterior motive.

I would go as far to argue that the rare acts of true kindness that don't hide sinister ulterior motives are what should labeled "inhuman'. It is acts of true selfless kindness that are contrary to what history has established time and again it means to be human.

To me, the question is more morally interesting if you can choose not to give it to anyone or no-one, but to have some choice over who you give it to.

Would you be able to resist putting your thumb on the scale and engineering a future race with traits you value and getting shot of some of those people who make the world, in your opinion, a worse place?

I think most behavior falls between the extremes of good and evil and is mostly neutral. I‘m bothered by despicable stuff like child abuse, so for me, I would like to rid the world of traits like deriving pleasure from harming others…in a nonconsensual sense. Apart from that extreme, I’d like to think that I’d avoid engineering people to suit my moral compass/preferences, but power does tend to change people, so it’s hard to know for sure what I’d do.

This thread should be in PPR

Note that my own morality, my own views over humanity, their existence and survival is different.

I'll make the cure. However -- it's conditional.
If I were to hold humanity's life at the palm of my hands -- it won't be a charity.

Since I'm not obligated to save them...
I can just easily deny humanity of their survival; why not make the most of that?
Doesn't matter which; whether whatever the idea of 'greater good' meant or something else. But one thing is certain is that I make sure I'm the one who calls the shots.


If I truly, truly just want to let humans survive, it's never out of compassion, it's out of derision.
I have different ideas of how to save humanity; but letting them subsist is not necessarily one of them.

Should I let them all live, it's to whatever hell they're making themselves with if such event won't change all of them to do better.


If one wants me to act out of compassion -- I'll let all humans die. Yes, I work 'backwards', pleading me to 'look deep in my heart' will backfire.
I'll just tell them to learn to appreciate the time they have left on this earth as some sort of parting lesson.

Why?? Why perpetuate this species for?
To continue the old cycles of war, discrimination, abuse, all the ignorance and exploitation all over again, against one another?


Me??
I'm not even one of the unlucky ones who got abused, belittled and beaten down. There's nothing for me to forgive or have grudge over the world, for that world doesn't exists for me.

But if I have an urge to lean one decision towards another?
It's to let them all die -- not out of spite or love, nor judgment over good and evil; but out of pure egocentric pleasure of being alone.

It meant that I can have the world to myself, with no imaginary human made systems in my way; until I'm gone as well for good as the last person on earth.

Gained Number Post Count (1).
Lose Time (n).

Lose more time here - Updates at least once a week.

Assuming I wouldn't be kidnapped and horribly tortured until forced to hand out the cure, I would refuse to give it to the following types of humans:

Politicians, murderers, politicians, rapists, politicians, any type of hate groups, politicians, people who kill endangered animals, politicians, Autism $peaks, politicians, PETA, politicians, quack doctors, politicians, conspiracy theorists, politicians, religious cultists, politicians, politicians, and politicians.

And many humans, especially the ones mentioned above, will likely refuse to believe the cure actually works and attempt to prevent the disease cure themselves by inhaling Lysol or whatever. After all, science is baaad!

Any good Muslim, including all of my family, will tell you that Islam isn't racist. In Islam, we don't discriminate against anyone for their race or national origin, as long as they get with the program and convert to Islam. It's a common misconception that Islam is misogynist. But that is not true at all; Islam teats women in ways that are entirely fair once you understand there's a reason men should hold authority over women. After all, everyone knows that women are lesser in religion and intellect. And sure we're extremely homophobic and transphobic, but that is because gay and trans people deserve to be treated badly. We are discriminating against anyone who doesn't deserve to be discriminated against. But look at how totally not racist we are. I mean, didn't you know that Bilal, one of Mohammed's closest friends, was black?

Ah shucks! I guess I'm an Islamophobe now.

Edit: this is an extremely nuanced subject that I struggle to talk about. On one hand, I understand that Muslims face a lot of hate; but on the other, as an ex-Muslim I'm very familiar with all the bad arguments. In my opinion, the problem with religions in general is that their adherents are unwilling to view their beliefs and leaders with any level of self-reflection, which leads them to increasingly embarrassing apologetics. I noticed this is the case with Christianity as well. But it not considered politically correct to criticize Islam.