← Back to context

Comment by pazimzadeh

1 day ago

yeah, more on the environmental constraints and where the machines even come from would be nice

> There is no emotion. There is no art. There is only logic

also this type of pure humanism seems disrespectful or just presumptuous, as if we are the only species which might be capable of "emotion, art and logic" even though we already have living counterexamples

I felt it difficult to continue with the story after that. If you're going to say, "Imagine, for a moment, a world with no humans" and mention walking the streets, then you have to assume the reader is going to think of our world, but with no humans. And then "There is no emotion" doesn't make sense. If you're going to say there are no humans, then why aren't you saying that there are no other living beings? So anyway, I found it hard to connect with the story right off the bat. I was off-putting in some way for sure.

Disrespectful? Of whom? It's a work of fiction. There's really no need to find something to offend you wherever you look.

  • of other animals

    but yeah I'm not sure that was the right word, just seems wrong. basically humanism seems like racism but towards other species. I guess speciesist?

    • This is a rather new stance, history books may one day label it as enlightened (I believe they will). We are not there though, and your stance is not obvious to the majority of people. I do experience that this is sentiment is growing. I personally see it as the moral high ground (both from the animal well-fare as the environmental perspective), whereas I didn't only a couple of years ago.

      1 reply →