|
|
|
|
|
|
by i000
1649 days ago
|
|
|
> But the relationship between population growth and technological growth seems fairly clear. Not at all. Many of the most densly populated regions in the world are far from the most technologically developed. Many of the most innovative countries (e.g. Sweden) are also quite sparsely populated. > Sure. And that would be a choice. I see no issue with this scenario. I do. While not extinction in the traditional sense, the world were the last human was already born. I cannot imagine being part of it. |
|
|
It would likely be temporary until we find a way to create more space and/or move to a synthetic medium.
In either case, it would be a choice. If you think people would choose living forever over having kids, you yourself are implying that people would find living forever more meaningful than having children, thus not "depriving them of the meaningful aspects of their lives," but rather, introducing something more meaningful: the ability to enjoy life without the Damocles Sword of death.
Bodily autonomy/choice ought to be a part of any society, and that includes dying when you choose to die. Who is anyone to tell an individual when they should die? The best we can do is give them the choice, as it's a deeply personal decision.