The current landscape of global challenges includes accelerating threats, like the global climate crisis or the escalating tensions between international relations sparking nuclear war, underscore the pressing risk of human extinction. Although physical life is the most basic foundation of building and maintaining a healthy functioning society, the pursuit of survival is a mere facet of the complex human journey. The quest for pursuing a "better" world, encompasses positively transformative initiatives, like sustainable development, social justice, technological process, and national cooperation. is a far more integral part interwoven into the fabric of our existence as opposed to human survival against extinction. This stance contends that prioritising a better world is not only essential for addressing immediate social issues but also serves as a proactive measure to prevent the existential risks that imperil our collective survival. Beneficially, prioritising the "betterness" of the world would acknowledge the moral obligations of fixing immediate social issues, the natural necessity for humans to live up to personal fulfilment that extends outside basic survival, and the prerequisite to solving for human extinction.

Firstly, to characterise the implementation of the "better" world, the notion of making the world "go better" implies a proactive approach to enhancing the overall quality of human life, encompassing aspects such as social welfare, sustainable development, equitable opportunities, and collective progress. To achieve this universal goal, the actors involved include policymakers, global leaders, NGOs, grassroots organisations, local communities, and average individuals. International governance bodies such as the United Nations would be incentivised to facilitate cooperation and resource allocation towards logistically fueling a multi-pronged strategy. Implementing such strategy would emphasise policy reform, such as carbon emission mitigation and promotion of renewable energy, social welfare programs addressing equitable access to public services, and engaging in diplomatic efforts with reconciliation programs. In such a context, our moral obligations in society revolve around the principle of collective well-being. These obligations encompass fostering empathy, ensuring equal access to resources and opportunities, mitigating suffering, and promoting a culture of inclusivity and cooperation. By embracing these principles, we uphold a moral compass that guides our actions toward creating a more equitable and world for present and future generations.

In the status quo, the urgent scenarios where human extinction is likely to occur within the same global challenges: climate change, nuclear war, or even increasing speed of AI development. Given that they are the key issues that are addressed under the topic of making the world "better," the prerequisite to preventing human extinction is to prioritise such issues. Focusing on improving the world in terms of sustainable environmental practices reduces the likelihood of catastrophic climate change, which is a key stakeholder threatening human extinction; therefore, fixing the root of human extinction, also considered a form of "making the world go better," similarly reduces the risk of extinction in terms of climate impacts. Similarly, by focusing on improving international relations by urging no violence between global superpowers, the chances of nuclear war impacting human extinction is mitigated. Simply put, improving the world is characterised as the quality of life determined by the impact of social issues. Such social issues are the reason why human extinction is a problem in the first place, therefore prioritising social issues is interlaced with prioritising human extinction due to it being a prerequisite.

To prioritise mere humane extinction shifts resource allocation towards basic survival needs for all, but this unfortunately neglects our complex hierarchy of fulfilment, which extends beyond simply surviving. Human extinction occurs due to the increase of fatality rate when the exposure to basic food, water, or safety shelters to hide from extreme weather phenomenons are impacting more communities. Therefore, the world would emphasise distribution of food, clean water, air, or safety shelters; however, this unfortunately neglects the natural desire to pursue external necessities, such as education, mastery in a skill or hobby, or connection with the complex society. Before the intervention of humans, the world was simpler. Animals lived in pursuit of basic survival: food, water, and shelter. Conversely, human society has far more needs to adhere to besides physical life. Psychological theories such as the Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs characterise the foundation for any basic human, which is not only staying alive, but self-actualization from the fabricated social standards determined by society as a whole. It characterises the physiological needs, then getting narrower and narrower following safety, love or belongingness, esteem, and self-actualization. The resource distribution under a world of prioritising extinction only fulfils the bottom tier of physiological needs. Instead, by prioritising the quality of life through connecting and interacting societal issues, one is able to achieve fulfilment, regarding esteem, relationships, or personal talent and skill because they have a connection to a uniquely diverse society.

Evidently, the status quo appears with immediate flaws that are to be prioritised by making the world "go better," whereas human extinction, although outweighs in magnitude, is a far-fetched impact that washes out the importance of immediate suffering existent right now. To risk a drastic resource allocation towards a non-immediate threat is morally dissuading towards those suffering in the present due to a lack of resources dedicated to improving the world. Moreover, the scope of the far fetched risk of human extinction appeals with little incentive for an average person to act on. Prioritising immediate threats aligns with ethical frameworks that emphasise the importance of ensuring the well-being and rights of individuals in the here and now. It reflects a moral imperative to alleviate the burdens and hardships faced by vulnerable populations, fostering empathy, compassion, and a sense of shared responsibility within communities and across global societies. Emphasising the resolution of immediate threats, such as the framework on what determines making the world go "better," can lead to tangible and meaningful improvements in the lives of people, fostering a more equitable and sustainable future for all.
Our physical life is inarguably the foundational building block towards further accessing the ability to contribute to societal issues; therefore, while it is arguable that human extinction comes first due to its grant for our consciousness, the realistic desire of survival follows by morality based principles. Specifically, our humanised fulfilment comes from our connections or contributions to the outside world in terms of social interactions, mastering talent, and reversing systemic social injustices. Knowing this, the stance of prioritising the betterness of the world is inclusive to the framework of our tier of societal priorities, preventing resource allocation to be settled towards the need for basic survival. Moreover, the aftermath of "bettering" the world is naturally the prevention fo human extinction, as the existing threats to human extinction are interlaced with the priorities involved with the betterness of the world. Lastly, human nature creates the incentive to care about immediate threats in the present or near future, such as the aspects of maximum life quality, whereas the far-fetched threat of human extinction is not an immediate threat, but rather the aftermath of not prioritising making the world go better.