31 - Likelihood of nuclear war. cover art

31 - Likelihood of nuclear war.

31 - Likelihood of nuclear war.

Listen for free

View show details
31 - Likelihood of nuclear war.
As of 2021, humanity has about 13,410 nuclear weapons, thousands of which are on hair-trigger alert. While stockpiles have been on the decline following the end of the Cold War, every nuclear country is currently undergoing modernization of its nuclear arsenal. The Bulletin advanced their symbolic Doomsday Clock in 2015, citing among other factors "a nuclear arms race resulting from modernization of huge arsenals". In January 2020, it was moved forward to 100 seconds before midnight. In 2023, it was moved forward to 90 seconds before midnight. In 2025, it was moved to 89 seconds before midnight. In January 2026, the clock moved to 85 seconds before midnight.
John F. Kennedy estimated the probability of the Cuban Missile Crisis escalating to nuclear conflict as between 33% and 50%.
In a poll of experts at the Global Catastrophic Risk Conference in Oxford (17–20 July 2008), the Future of Humanity Institute estimated the probability of complete human extinction by nuclear weapons at 1% within the century, the probability of 1 billion dead at 10% and the probability of 1 million dead at 30%. These results reflect the median opinions of a group of experts, rather than a probabilistic model; the actual values may be much lower or higher.
Scientists have argued that even a small-scale nuclear war between two countries, such as India and Pakistan, could have devastating global consequences and such local conflicts are more likely than full-scale nuclear war.

Moral importance of human extinction risk.
In his book Reasons and Persons, philosopher Derek Parfit posed the following question:
Compare three outcomes:
1 - Peace.
2 - A nuclear war that kills 99% of the world's existing population.
3 - A nuclear war that kills 100%.
(2) would be worse than (1), and (3) would be worse than (2). Which is the greater of these two differences?
He continues that "Most people believe that the greater difference is between (1) and (2). I believe that the difference between (2) and (3) is very much greater." Thus, he argues, even if it would be bad if massive numbers of humans died, human extinction would itself be much worse because it prevents the existence of all future generations. And given the magnitude of the calamity were the human race to become extinct, Nick Bostrom argues that there is an overwhelming moral imperative to reduce even small risks of human extinction.


Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/extinction-of-the-human-species--7081249/support.

This episode includes AI-generated content.
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_t1
No reviews yet