6 ms·
The argument is invalid because it ignores the possibility of something other than death creating change. As the article notes, there are plenty of examples of
by orangecat 1y ago
The argument is invalid because it ignores the possibility of something other than death creating change. As the article notes, there are plenty of examples of widespread societal change that didn't require previous generations to die off.
- prmph 1y agoI agree. One other problem with the death-necessary-for-change mantra is that it assumes very change is good. There have been plenty of changes in recent memory that have been disastrous.