Should We Go Extinct?: A Philosophical Dilemma for Our Unbearable Times

In the face of widespread ecological damage, the threat of nuclear war, and other human-wrought ills, might the world “be better off without us,” muses philosopher May (A Decent Life) in this stimulating treatise. He begins by tallying up the positives humankind brings to the table, including happiness and “important experiences” that only humans can have with the world (such as appreciating things that are “good” in and of themselves, like a beautiful painting). On the other side of the equation are “the misery we create over and against the experiences of truth, beauty, and the good life” and widespread ecological damages incurred by industrial farming and deforestation. May briefly entertains then debunks several solutions, such as humanity continuing to exist on a smaller scale—though even less-populated, more dispersed communities would eventually find one another and balloon to today’s unsustainable population size, he theorizes—before suggesting sensible initiatives, like curtailing factory farming. While the author leaves his central question unanswered and generally refrains from connecting his proposals to concrete action steps, curious readers will appreciate May’s ability to translate weighty philosophical concepts with surprising ease and clarity. The result is a lucid treatment of a provocative thought experiment. (Aug.)