(February 29, 2016 at 8:46 pm)thool Wrote: Maybe part of why we exist is to BE ABLE to do those things, but I still believe we exist to simply make more people (or indirectly to enable the creation of people and continuation of those lives).
If we are successful as a species, we will create more people. But is not creating more people necessarily a failure? It is simply one of the two possible outcomes. Because we are biased toward survival, we view the survival of the species as the winning condition. But we are not the species. What is a winning condition for us personally does not speak to what is a winning condition for the species except as an artifact of our perspective. But we aren't the species human, just individual humans with varying perspective on what the winning condition for ourselves is. Our purpose is whatever we view as the winning condition for us personally is, not what we would project onto the species as a whole. The species as a whole, on naturalism, has no winning condition; it's neutral to whether 'we' survive or don't survive. Both are equally natural outcomes.
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)