Hard to say.... As I'm sure you know, the trouble with statistics is that they can be slanted in any direction. For example, if one considers all causes of death in the U.S. in the last decade, the large number of opioid overdoses is going to make a big dent in the average lifespan reading. You could try to only count deaths from "natural causes," but then you'd be injecting a bias as to what is or is not natural - a hazy distinction.LuckyR: It would be more accurate to say that it no longer lengthening (rather than shortening).
Featured Article: Philosophical Analysis of Abortion, The Right to Life, and Murder
- Posts: 3093
- Joined: February 9th, 2009, 5:45 am
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 3082
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
"Better" is subjective. So it's like asking whether Igor Stravinsky or Frank Zappa is better. There is no right answer to that question. Any answer simply tells us about the respondent's preferences at the time they answered.Nemo wrote: ↑November 4th, 2019, 8:31 amI think you misunderstand this philosophy, it has nothing to do with overpopulation, or depressed thoughts. Just an argument of
which state is better. Existence or non-existence, but it doesn't talk about suicide, if ur already alive, just live to the fullest. And it's hard to argue that existence is better.