Should humanity continue to exist or not? This question has puzzled philosophers, scientists, and thinkers throughout history. In this article, we will explore the advantages and disadvantages of human existence and attempt to find an answer to this profound question.
Advantages of HUMAn Existence
If we consider humanity's contribution to the Earth, two main benefits stand out:
1. Increasing Entropy
According to the second law of thermodynamics, all living beings contribute to increasing entropy. Humans, with their complex societies, industrial activities, and technological advancements, have arguably accelerated this process. However, this benefit is not exclusive to humans—other organisms also contribute to entropy. For example, decaying forests naturally recycle nutrients, a process that continues even in human absence. (Scholarly resources like ‘Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach’ by Çengel and Boles provide an in-depth look at how entropy operates in physical systems, including living organisms)
2. Balancing the Ecosystem
Like all living beings, humans also play an important role in the natural food cycle and balance the ecosystem. But human activities like destroying forests, creating pollution outweigh this benefit.
Disadvantages of human existence
Humanity's existence also brings significant drawbacks, some of which could threaten the survival of the planet itself.
1. Pollution and Environmental Degradation
The Industrial Revolution marked a turning point in human history, leading to unprecedented economic growth. However, it also gave rise to pollution on a massive scale. Studies show that carbon dioxide emissions have increased by over 40% since pre-industrial times, contributing to climate change. Events such as the Chernobyl disaster (1986) and the Deepwater Horizon oil spill (2010) illustrate humanity’s capacity for environmental destruction. And the Global Carbon Project reported that in 2022, global CO2 emissions reached 37.5 billion metric tons, marking a steady increase since pre-industrial times.
2. Human Behavior: Greed and Conflict
The human tendency toward greed and consumption has driven resource depletion and inequality. For instance, studies in behavioral psychology, such as the "tragedy of the commons," demonstrate how individuals act selfishly when accessing shared resources, often leading to collective harm. Furthermore, conflicts like the Russia-Ukraine war or ongoing geopolitical tensions reveal how anger and power struggles can lead to catastrophic consequences, including the potential for nuclear war.
Ideologies and their failures
Many ideologies have tried to give a solution to this problem of human psychology, almost all of them have fallen short:
1. Religious Ideologies
Religions often promise peace and moral guidance, yet history is replete with religious conflicts such as the Crusades or sectarian violence in the modern era. Despite their noble intentions, religions have often divided humanity rather than united it. Pew Research Center reports that over 50% of global conflicts in the 21st century have some religious component.
2. Political Ideologies
Political movements like Marxism and communism sought to create a utopian society. However, their application led to regimes that caused immense suffering, such as Stalin’s purges in the Soviet Union and Mao Zedong’s Great Leap Forward in China, which resulted in millions of deaths.
As Jiddu Krishnamurti famously said:
"All ideologies are idiotic, whether religious or political."
Problems with Jiddu krishnamurti’s method of psychological change
Now, some might argue that although ideologies can't solve human problems, thinkers like J. Krishnamurti have provided a method which can address the problems of human change. Jiddu Krishnamurti, no doubt, was one of the greatest thinkers of the last century. In his talks, he criticized ideologies and religions. He believed that only a radical change in human psychology can solve human problems. Only through this radical change can we bring peace to the world. I mostly agree with this. However, the problem with this philosophy is that it's not applicable on a large scale. While it is effective, only a few people follow this path. It's nearly impossible to apply this on a large scale because it's uncomfortable for most people to question their beliefs and become self-aware. Most humans don't want to inquire within themselves. They avoid challenging societal norms. So, although it is the best method to change humans, its scalability remains limited because most people resist deep introspection and change. Furthermore, psychological studies, such as those by Daniel Kahnerman in 'Thinking, Fast and Slow,' explain how cognitive biases, like confirmation bias, hinder both self-awareness and societal change.
Solution
- Genetic engineering: Genetic engineering is the process of changing the DNA of a living organism to make it different. Scientists can add, remove, or modify parts of the DNA to give the organism new traits or fix problems. Genetically influencing traits like greed, anger, and selfishness could help to some extent. While genetics can influence behavior, traits like greed, anger, and selfishness are not solely determined by genetics. They are also shaped by environmental factors, upbringing, culture, and personal experiences. Even if it could hypothetically be possible, this would require significant advancements in technology and is extremely difficult to achieve. Many people will resist this kind of genetic change because they believe humans are made by God and that we don't have the right to alter their DNA.
- End of humanity: A better method that comes to mind is the end of humanity due to climate change. Climate change is not a curse; it's a boon. If humans can't preserve this Earth, then they don't deserve to live on it. Some might argue, “What if, in the future, humans succeed in reversing climate change?” My response is that if humans do manage to reverse climate change in the future, it would prove that we deserve to live on this Earth. Either way, nature will prevail – if we fail to stop climate change, we will die, and if we succeed, nature will still be saved.
COnclusion
The quote from True Detective, "Human consciousness is a tragic misstep in evolution," resonates with many philosophical critiques of human existence. Evolutionarily, humans have developed self-awareness, but this has led to existential crisis, overconsumption, and a disconnect from nature.
Some people might say that it depends on the observer's perspective whether they see more good or bad in the world. However, I believe I have observed both sides – the good and the bad – and concluded that there is more bad than good.
The future of humanity depends on whether we can learn from our mistakes and make changes more responsibly.
In the end, humanity's survival will be decided by our actions. If we can work together to protect the planet and create a fairer world, we prove we deserve to exist. If we fail, nature will correct itself without us. The choice is ours to make.
SHOULD HUMANITY CONTINUE TO EXIST?