When I think of those in Indonesia who lost their families, their possessions, and been themselves injured, the question is not whether they can survive but why they would want to survive. I can understand those in the Nazi camps who threw themselves upon electric fences, but am pressed to understand those who made every effort to live as long as possible no matter how miserable their condition or grim their prospects.
Can either choice be rationally defended, or does it simply come down to individual differences? Certainly the survivor-types are better able to carry on the species, but can even this be rationally defended? That is, can a case be made that our perpetuation is preferable to our extinction? I don’t believe it can, but this does not deter us from trying; as a species, we have no choice in the matter.