[Arkhadia]

I think the reality is there is no saving anything. Only surviving as long as we can. Why dump billions into an impossible goal of saving when we could invest in survival? I hope I’m wrong but anyone that knows anything about investments knows that there’s a point where you need to cut your losses

[doctorwho42]

The system of economics that we use is quite new on the historical scale, using it in your argument to say that saving earth based life (which we are apart of) is not financially viable is the most absurd thing in modern society. Without the ecosphere, the economic system ceases to exist... So by the very definition, it is the utmost important and therefore not only viable but absolutely necessary.

[fc417fc802]

It isn't clear what criteria is being used here for "saving" something. People often use "save the planet" to mean stopping most or all ecological changes. That very well might not be viable in which case survival ie adaptation is the other option.

[buuuddee]

Physics places no such honorific obligation on the species.

This just smacks of self serving “don’t end society I rely on” existential dread. While that booj materialism acts with indifference to externalities.

If the ramifications of there being no immutable force obliging us to preserve each other spread, omg. Then we roleplay out the reality daily with the lack of empathy driving us to the streets 24/7 until better healthcare legislation is passed.

As a culture we rhetorically make such high minded sounding rhetoric then equivocate away doing the work to live up to it. Got trite philosophy to post online don’t you know.