1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/content/entry/antinatalism.md b/content/entry/antinatalism.md
index b852495..59453ff 100644
--- a/content/entry/antinatalism.md
+++ b/content/entry/antinatalism.md
@@ -165,7 +165,7 @@ Antinatalists claim that most people do not evaluate reality correctly. They cla
 
 Some antinatalists further argue that the lives of all animals are very bad, not only the lives of humans. This philosophy is known as "universal antinatalism". According to universal antinatalism, since humans are the only species capable of understanding the predicament, we ought to sterilize other animal species to save them from their default state in the wild which is a life of struggle.
 
-I don't know whether or not depressive realism is true. I'm also not sure whether animals suffer more than they flourish. I will give the antinatalists credit on these points. The suffering of descendants does seem to be the strongest argument in favor of no one having children and animal sterilization out of all the antinatalist arguments.
+I don't know whether depressive realism is true. I'm also not sure whether animals suffer more than they flourish. I will give the antinatalists credit on these points. The suffering of descendants does seem to be the strongest argument in favor of no one having children and animal sterilization out of all the antinatalist arguments.
 
 However there is the possibility that future technology might deliver us eternal bliss so good it would retroactively justify all humanity's past suffering and the suffering of all other beings. This is a point Matt Dillahunty made when he addressed antinatalism. However it's not a valid point since it seems equally plausible that future technology could create suffering, perhaps even unfathomable torment beyond anything we've ever experienced. As a side note, [Matt's criticism of antinatalism](https://yewtu.be/embed/n9BFG0Xh4Wg?local=true) seems to miss the point.