Equating "some trees" ie. a random sample of m-of-n trees (ie. we need an adequate number of trees more than X additional people) with "some trees" eg. pine trees are better than black people is sophistry
-
-
-
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
idgaf about merely potential people
-
so there is no current overpopulation, only potential overpopulation?
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I'm generally pro-natalist, but I'd be more upset if the tree outside my apartment were cut down than if some stranger I'd never heard of died. Actually of course the latter happens all the time.
-
that's natural. which is more upsetting, some tree on the other side of the world dying or some stranger on the other side of the world dying
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
No, not really. I don't value any human ethno-pop LESS (than any other human ethno-pop), but I do think that this planet and humans were better off if we figured a way to gently, noncoercively, nonviolently plateau the population at around 4 billions and keep it there.
-
I do value some individual humans less than some other individual humans, but I don't think "Trump's life is less valuable than the life of a little grandma who sells pies and writes funny stories in her spare time" is super controversial.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
with without trees people will also suffer so it's just that n+2 is more valuable than n+1. it's called delaying gratification. try it sometime
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.