The Relationship Between Antinatalism & Extinction

Подписаться 4,1 тыс.

Просмотров 1,8 тыс.

50% 1

Antinatalism is often confused for or conflated with extinctionism. In this video I explain why I don't think that antinatalism implies extinctionism, and why an antinatalist doesn't necessarily need to be pro-extinction.
A version of this video was premiered at the launch event of Matti Häyry and Amanda Sukenick's book Antinatalism, Extinction & an End to Procreative Self Corruption. The event can be seen here: • The Grand launch event...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~INFO~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Subscribe - join the cult!
❤️ | Make a Donation: streamlabs.com/lawrenceanton/
💪 | Patreon: / lawrenceanton
👉 | Follow me on X: / lawrence_anton1
📣 | An Antinatalist Handbook: antinatalisthandbook.org
✊ | Antinatalist Advocacy: antinatalistadvocacy.org
📧 | Contact Me: lawrenceant@protonmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~TIMESTAMPS~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
00:00 - Intro
00:31 - Defining Terms
01:52 - The Fundamental Difference
03:32 - A Use of Force (Scopes & Methods)
10:16 - Antinatalism Informing Extinctionism
13:01 - A Case Study
18:28 - Extinction in Antinatalist Discourse
19:36 - Recap & Outro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~LINKS~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Human Extinction: A History of the Science and Ethics of Annihilation (Emile P. Torres):
• Full: www.amazon.co.uk/Human-Extinc...
• Abridged: / human-extinction-a-bri...
Voluntary Human Extinction Movement: www.vhemt.org
Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence (David Benatar): www.amazon.co.uk/Better-Never...
Why Antinatalists Should STOP Talking About The Red Button: • Why Antinatalists Shou...
Antinatalism ABORTION Discussion | Pro-LIFE vs Pro-DEATH vs Pro-CHOICE: • Antinatalism ABORTION ...
Antinatalism, Extinction & an End to Procreative Self Corruption (Matti Häyry & Amanda Sukenick): www.cambridge.org/core/elemen...
David Benatar, : Anti-Natalism, Abortion, Suicide, Euthanasia, Environmentalism: • #148 David Benatar: An...
Should Antinatalists Discuss the RED BUTTON? | Cosmic Antinatalist: • Should Antinatalists D...
Are Animals Included in Antinatalism?: • Are Animals Included i...
Antinatalism & the Future of Suffering | Magnus Vinding & Brian Tomasik: • Antinatalism & the Fut...
Outro Music // The Last Time - Kayou. // Provided by ‪@LofiGirl‬

Опубликовано:

6 авг 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 77

@LawrenceAnton 2 месяца назад

What do you think about the relationship between Antinatalism and extinctionism? 🌎 Join the supporter community and get perks: patreon.com/lawrenceanton/

@LouisGedo 2 месяца назад

Hello all you lovely people 👋

@LouisGedo 2 месяца назад

Lawrence, I know this is a tall accomplishment because all of your content is so good but this is my favorite video of yours thus far! 👏 👏 👏 As for killing under Extinctionism, is there a distinction seen between intentional killing of all members of a group by humans and inadvertent killing of all members of a group as a consequence of secondary environmental impact of human activity specifically on certain species? 🤔

@LouisGedo 2 месяца назад

SHARING

@LouisGedo 2 месяца назад

Do you know who Jamie Woodhouse is? He runs the channel and group called Sentientism. Would you be opposed to me reaching out to him to suggest to have you as a guest on his channel...... or would that not interest you at all? This is assuming you haven't already been a guest which as far as I recall, you haven't been.

@skibidi.G 2 месяца назад

This guy, Mr Anton is an antiwhite shill ✌️

@combinero.YT_deletes_comments. 2 месяца назад

Antinatalism without extinctionism does not make sense, because the only way to stop suffering is to eliminate life. I see no point to limit antinatalism only to about not starting a life, I think that antinatalism should be wider.

@abhishekm6703 2 месяца назад

Why do we need Anti-natalism or Veganism or Pro-mortalism or any other philosophy or positions other than Extinctionism? Just focus on Extinctionism.

@henryp. 2 месяца назад

As he said, he's not arguing for or against extinctionism. AN = // = NU, extinction, promortalism, efilism (necessarily) If Lawrence could live indefinitely as last human and is perfectly happy, his AN doesn't entail he must exit. Where I can see AN leading to use of force or extinction is to prevent more impositions (births) under NU. For example is red-buttoning the entire universe to prevent future impositions of risk of suffering.

@etruscanetwork 2 месяца назад

You can still be an antinatalist AND an extinctionist tho, these two philosophies don't necessarily exclude each other

@TheStratinator 2 месяца назад

That's just not what antinatalism is. Antinatalism, as the name suggests, is about childbirth, not about suffering generally.

@Hatasumi69 2 месяца назад

I think the main hurdle is that you don't have a right to end a life unless it gives you clear and proven consent - as an ethical extinctionist you'd have to do the hard work of building a better world full of actual ability to consent for all things that feel and have sentience and even a glimmer of sapience before you can end it all. Otherwise, why not start now and just eat one animal at a time for the sake of fueling yourself while you convince others to hunt animals for sustenance in between fighting genocides, since extinction is more important than consent if you want any other option than not creating life or the hard work of unsuring you were fair to it unlike the universe and most of society now? Extreme I know, but my point is to show that you'll just end up on the same path to maximising suffering that we're on now with no guarantee to end it in any better way than it's going to now - messily and with stray survivors with the chance to evolve and begin the cycle of suffering all over again. At the end of the day, we can at least take a dark solace in the fact that humanity is already an extinctionist society by way of greed, leading the next great mass extinction event already unfolding - whether we want it to or not as individuals.

@ikimus 2 месяца назад

I guess I'm both an antinatalist and an extinctionist.

@absarius1216 2 месяца назад

Very important topic. So many extinctionists fail to see why antinatalism itself don't require extinction to achieve its goal.

@xenocrates2559 2 месяца назад

I'm a bit puzzled by the disagreement on this topic among antinatalists. I think this might be a difference between seeing AN as an individual commitment as opposed to a universal standard. If AN, not starting new sentient existence, is an individual commitment that does not necessarily lead to extinction because as an individual commitment AN does not generate the conditions, such as universal adoption of AN, to bring about extinction. On the other hand, if you think of AN in a Kantian way (that AN is a kind of categorical imperative) then AN would inherently commit its adherents to extinctionism. // An analogy might help; there are people who refrain from alcohol for many different reasons. Most people who have this commitment that I have met do not think of this commitment as a universal imperative and don't mind if others drink alcohol even if they would prefer that this was the case. On the other hand, there exists a dedicated group that wants to outlaw alcohol, often for religious reasons (and sometimes they get their way; see Prohibition in the U.S.) You could say they are alcohol extinctionists. In the first case, if everyone agrees not to consume alcohol the 'extinction' of alcohol is the result; but it is not a necessary consequence of the first perspective. In the second case, the extinction of alcohol is the point. // Perhaps my analogy is off base; correct me if that is the case. // Thanks for the video.

@vegangames3468 27 дней назад

Excellent. Thanks. 💙

@LawrenceAnton 27 дней назад

Cheers!

@scottstollery2191 2 месяца назад

Excellent discussion! I actually just finished Hayry and Sukenick's book last night, and was pleased by its overall presentation of various topics within antinatalism. I was also happy to see your quotes in there as well. Thank you for exploring this topic more in depth, because I had always conflated antinatalism with extinctionism. But I see the finer point with more clarity now. One thing a little confusing with the book was that they quoted or talked about a pronatalist with your same last name (Corey Anton). If someone didn't know who you were they might read "Anton's optimistic life-enthusiasm appeals to potential reproducers" and mistakenly attribute that idea to you, haha!

@LawrenceAnton 2 месяца назад

That would be one hell of a misunderstanding 😂 Glad my content could be of service though!

@HT-rq5pi 2 месяца назад

nice video. It might seem obvious but i did not realise that the extinctionists and antinatalists could disagree on the question of immortality.

@LawrenceAnton 2 месяца назад

It’s obvious once you think about it but not apparent when you first hear about the two viewpoints, hence the confusion

@TempehLiberation 2 месяца назад

Great video Lawrence, as always. I agree that antinatalism doesn't necessarily imply a position on extinction (in all it's different flavors lol). I suppose I'll have to call myself a vegantinatalist sentiocentric extinctionist.

@LawrenceAnton 2 месяца назад

Smack that on your CV lad! 😂

@lovethyneibor22736 2 месяца назад

Amazing philosophy of antinatalism so much better than the current society ❤

@bloomerboi21 2 месяца назад

I was waiting for you to upload. Thanks.

@LawrenceAnton 2 месяца назад

The time has come

@RoseAmina-ol1kd 2 месяца назад

The same. My favourite youtube channel.

@LawrenceAnton 2 месяца назад

@@RoseAmina-ol1kd Much appreciated ❤️

@pyros0me 2 месяца назад

Loved the video! Very well explained. Lawrence, I have an unrelated question. Is there any way to contact Oscar Horta who talked about animal contraception at the Antinatalist Conference?

@LawrenceAnton 2 месяца назад

Thanks so much! There is, his email can be found online: oscar.horta@usc.es you may also be able to contact him via Animal Ethics

@Mag_1418 2 месяца назад

@@LawrenceAnton Thank you!

@LawrenceAnton 2 месяца назад

@@Mag_1418 My pleasure Mag!

@WackyConundrum 2 месяца назад

20:02 "antinatalism, on the other hand, does not necessitate the use of force for it to be fully realized (...)" I think you are making a somewhat similar mistake to that of Häyry and Sukenick (2024). That is, you are introducing vagueness where there is none. There is no "full realization" of antinatalism. There is no "goal", "purpose", "plan" for humanity to "realize antinatalism".

@LawrenceAnton 2 месяца назад

There is no goal to the philosophy but when I say full realisation I mean if everyone fulfilled their negative duty to not create other sentient beings. I’m not sure this is vague. Additionally, it wasn’t necessarily vagueness that was the issue in Amanda and Matti’s work (although there was some), it was the conflation of two distinct things.

@andrewsmcintosh 2 месяца назад

Yes, you're right, AN and extinctionism aren't the same things, for the reasons you (and CGPT) gave (I think you over state your case but that's just personal preference). Extinctionism doesn't even have to include AN. If someone was ready to go the full James Bond villian and kill the world, it wouldn't matter if anyone were having kids or not. I think it's important to emphasise that philanthropic AN should remain voluntary if it's going to be consistent with non-imposing ethics. I don't think there's any question that AN should be imposed - it shouldn't. Not just for AN reasons either. I agree with Conundrum that AN doesn't have an end goal, or needs one, for the reasons you mention at the end of this video about dealing with individuals, and what an individual can and can't do. It should be an individual, voluntary choice to not reproduce/reproduce any more. EDIT - in fact, what with AN ethics being opposed to imposition, it could be said that AN would be morally opposed to any imposed extinction. Which would be any extinction brought deliberately about. BUT - there is with both AN and extinctionism the underlying pessimist notion that Life is undesirable, and I think that's what's going on with a lot of the confusion/conflation. There is a logical sense in saying, if pessimism says Life is shit, and if AN says because Life is shit we shouldn't make any more of it, then it makes sense to want to end Life, because it's shit. There's a paradox here that's a bit obvious, in that wanting Life to end (or at least stop being shit) and making it happen are two totally different things, and that pessimism doesn't say outright that Life should end. But the logic of the thinking remains. It's something that forces pessimism, and therefore AN and extinctionism, into an absurd position that can't be conclusively resolved.

@TheFettuck 2 месяца назад

The extinction of humans is an obvious consequence of antinatalism! Humans will go extinct when they aren't born anymore! Lawrence simply doesn't want to acknowlegde this because he doesn't want to look like a bad person (by ending his own entire species). This is why he made up all of these excuses and fake comparisons.

@defendor10 2 месяца назад

💯 ❤ 👍🏻

@user-yj2mq7bc4p 2 месяца назад

Nice

@_APG_ Месяц назад

_"I don't understand/accept the logical conclusions of my own beliefs so therefore I and the world around me are magically exempt from the consequences of those beliefs!"_ 9,001 IQ take right there, let me tell you lmfao!

@user-no2hi6ye4d Месяц назад

Dude they should fkin' make their mascot the Dodo Bird LOL

@_APG_ Месяц назад

@@user-no2hi6ye4d OMFG 😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣

@dio69666 2 месяца назад

I'm not an extinctionist myself, I think antinatalism is the best method to avoid extinction for humans. So I'm an antinatalist because I'm not an extinctionist. But I cannot blame extinctionists or efilists. I definitely agree that all sentience is torture and morally wrong

@bloomerboi21 2 месяца назад

Exactly

@LawrenceAnton 2 месяца назад

I may be misunderstanding, but why do you think Antinatalism is the best way to avoid extinction?

@TheFettuck 2 месяца назад

The extinction of humans is a consequence of antinatalism! Humans will go extinct when they aren't born anymore!

@PavelShkolnikov15 2 месяца назад

Right. In addition, there are also different types of antinatalism with different motivations, for example, situational political. Today it is beneficial for the state to encourage antinatalism, but tomorrow natalism may be the right direction. Please do another analysis about the fact that antinatalism ≠ veganism. That is, if you're an antinatalist, you don't necessarily think it's bad to enjoy a juicy steak from a pig you've slaughtered.

@FactsCountdown 2 месяца назад

You don't even know what antinatalism is

@ajsims1996 2 месяца назад

I find extinctionism a fruitless effort. Staying alive just so you can maybe end all lives later? That makes no sense. Checking out early makes more sense. Unfortunately tho I am a beiliever in an all powerful, all evil god. So I think all things are pointless and we are stuck in this hell for eternity. I have no mouth and I must scream but worse

@Enoynanone 2 месяца назад

This is just mental gymnastics ofcourse if what you are preaching got accepted it will lead to extinction..nd yes it won't get accepted worldwide but that is a completely diffrent point.... Also if life is inherently bad it's bad. You are acting like it is bad for someone who doesn't exist but magically becomes alright once you start existing...you are just defeating your own argument. Once somone exists it is such a mess for them to stop existing again they are trapped here...yes that is true, but that makes life worse not better.

@TheFettuck 2 месяца назад

Agreed! Antinatalists do force the extinction of humans when they stop procreating! His logic is one giant contradiction!

@henryp. 2 месяца назад

_"This is just mental gymnastics ofcourse if what you are preaching got accepted it will lead to extinction"_ sure, but that is not necessarily the goal, just a potential consequence. Not same as extinction-ism. However with indefinite life extension than it won't lead to extinction. So yeah...

@Enoynanone 2 месяца назад

@henryp. what is the goal then?? You would want to stop creating new persons bcs existence is suffering. If existence is bad, then it is bad, period. It does not become good for a person who already exists, and if it does, then why are you even trying to stop it from happening in the first place??? I don't understand this ridiculous argument in which people try to balance on two boats just to stay on the right side of people's perceptions. If you do not want existence for someone, you deem existence something that is bad, and if it is bad it has to be bad for people who are already existing bcs if it is not bad once you start existing then what is the point???

@henryp. 2 месяца назад

@@Enoynanone because firstly there is no NEEDS that need satisfying... for someone that doesn't yet exist in the first place (the absent martians don't need 2 exist), once they exist they may have an interest in satisfying their NEEDS, Second, a newborn child doesn't/can't consent or agree to the situation & risks imposed (disease, car accidents, natural disasters, other harms) that decision is entirely made for & imposed onto them by the procreator, akin to me taking your money and investing it at Las Vegas in hopes of making a profit. (Even if likelihood of winning was 90%) (All because you're temporarily unconscious and I can't get your consent), that's a crime. There's a difference if you made an informed decision where you accept the RISK on yourself, obvious example, take smoking, drinking as adult vs giving it to a kid. Or having them go base-jumping, LIFE/existence is a "minefield" (so to speak) or it's putting kids on tightropes, a ricket-roller-coaster, entering them into over 10,000 lotteries of risks, how else can I say or analogize it...? You're putting someone else in harm's way and they have no automny or decision in the matter.

@Enoynanone 2 месяца назад

@@henryp. i don't know what you are going on about...i simply said if coming to existence is bad (according to antinatelisem), then existence itself has to be BAD. And if existence is not bad, then why to stop someone from existing? If you are saying that it is a mattter of risk and chance then I have to remind you that life is risky even after you exists, your can't give consent to many things even when you are already existing. Your needs are only here bcs you exists once you stop existing they will again vanish...my point is simple either existence is bad by design or it is not..if not then why would you stop it from happening. And if yes, then you have to accept that it is bad to exist and it is bad to KEEP EXISTING.

@wiezumteufel9024 2 месяца назад

Antinatalism is a wonderful philosophy but absolutely useless in the real world. 99% of humans and 100% of animals will never be stopped by outreach events or debates🤷🏼‍♂️

@LawrenceAnton 2 месяца назад

Good argument for engage in things other than outreach and debates

@wiezumteufel9024 2 месяца назад

@@LawrenceAntonBut this would mean "using force" instead, which wouldn't be unsuccessful either for obvious reasons. Either way we are doomed.

@LawrenceAnton 2 месяца назад

@@wiezumteufel9024 I believe that is a false dichotomy. There are not only two options: outreach or force. There are many other ways that antinatalists can influence the behaviour of others to bring less individuals into existence. Just one example (although there are plenty more) is donating to, volunteering for or working for charities and groups that increase access to and uptake of contraception.

@wiezumteufel9024 2 месяца назад

@@LawrenceAnton We already have contraceptives en masse in the developed world but most people are still breeding. Its like a drop in the ocean.

@Hatasumi69 2 месяца назад

@@wiezumteufel9024 I don't think your argument is convincing because you ignore the fact that human social models are subject to change across time; Christianity started as a bizarre cult and grew into a world defining power, slavery co-existed and was justified under this system for centuries and so was the divine right of kings - yet look how the world has changed in just the last 200 years and how new viewpoints are continuing to flourish and spread. Things deemed impossible to survive thrive all the time and things deemed eternal collapse all the time on a culturally relevant scale. Antinatlism is not impossible and is far more applicable and rationally justifiable than many belief systems that are showing declines these days, despite extremists attempting to retain and restoke old power - so there's no logical reason to think antinatilism won't keep growing, as it has been doing for many years and across the globe, beyond a personal fault of bias honestly.