Fidan Jafarova

22.09.2023

Topic: Ethics

Question: Should people who care about the long-term future focus on reducing the risk of

human extinction, or instead on trying to make the world go better in futures where humanity

survives a long time?

The debate between focusing on reducing the risk of human extinction or improving

future outcomes for humanity is a complex ethical dilemma that requires careful consideration.

Long-term thinking and ethical considerations play a crucial role in shaping our decision-making

processes, as they determine the actions we take to safeguard the survival and prosperity of

future generations. In this essay, I will explore both perspectives and argue that while preventing

extinction is undeniably important, it is equally essential to prioritize improving lasting futures.

To begin with, let us define key terms such as "human extinction" and "lasting futures."

Human extinction refers to the complete annihilation of the human species from Earth, resulting

in our permanent disappearance as a biological entity. On the other hand, lasting futures allude to

creating sustainable conditions that enable humanity to thrive for an extended period without

facing existential risks.

These concepts are vital in the field of ethics since they inform our decisions about how

we should act today to ensure a better tomorrow. By contemplating what constitutes a "better"

future, we grapple with questions regarding quality of life, environmental sustainability,

technological advancement, social justice, and more.

There are compelling arguments supporting the idea that people who care about the long-

term future should focus on reducing the risk of human extinction. The potential catastrophic

events or existential risks that could lead to human extinction demand immediate attention.
These risks include natural disasters like asteroid impacts or supervolcano eruptions as well as

human-made threats such as nuclear war or climate change.

Ethically speaking, prioritizing survival over other considerations aligns with various

moral frameworks such as utilitarianism which seeks to maximize overall happiness by

minimizing suffering. By preventing extinction, we ensure the preservation of the human species

and its potential to contribute to the well-being of future generations.

However, it is equally important to focus on making the world better in futures where

humanity survives a long time. This approach involves strategies that enhance societal,

environmental, and technological conditions to ensure a positive future. By striving for progress

and improvement, we can create a world that not only survives but also flourishes.

From an ethical standpoint, prioritizing quality of life over mere survival resonates with

moral theories like deontology which emphasizes individual rights and duties. In this context,

improving lasting futures involves addressing issues such as poverty alleviation, education

accessibility, healthcare advancements, environmental conservation, and social equity.

When evaluating both approaches - preventing extinction versus improving lasting

futures - it is crucial to consider their respective strengths, weaknesses, and potential trade-offs.

Preventing extinction provides immediate risk reduction by focusing on existential threats;

however, it may neglect broader systemic challenges facing humanity in the long run. On the

other hand, improving lasting futures addresses these systemic challenges but does not directly

address imminent risks that could lead to extinction.

Analyzing each approach through different moral frameworks helps shed light on their

compatibility with various ethical perspectives. The utilitarian perspective favors preventing

extinction since it minimizes overall suffering by ensuring our survival as a species. Conversely,

deontological ethics highlight the importance of individual rights and may prioritize actions that

enhance lasting futures through social justice initiatives.

 To strike a balance between reducing existential risks while also working towards

improving lasting futures requires careful consideration and collaboration among stakeholders

from diverse fields. It is crucial to address potential conflicts or tensions that may arise between

these two goals. For instance, allocating resources towards immediate risk reduction might divert

attention and resources away from longer-term improvements.

In conclusion, the debate between preventing extinction or improving lasting futures

raises profound ethical considerations for long-term thinkers. While preventing extinction is

undeniably important to safeguard the survival of humanity in the face of catastrophic risks, it is

equally vital to prioritize making the world better for future generations where existential threats

are not imminent. Striking a balance between risk reduction and future improvement demands

collaboration and thoughtful decision-making guided by various moral frameworks. By

embracing this holistic approach, we can ensure a sustainable and prosperous future for all.