No, one doesn't suffer because of being born, it isn't possible to suffer without being born, and it may not be possible to be born and not suffer -- but this still doesn't mean that birth itself causes suffering. Other stuff causes suffering, you know that.
People don't get over things because they die, lol. See, you have to just believe that everyone really hates life, and wants to die, regardless of what they say, and how they act. You just have to ignore that, and think they're lying or delusional. You're a True Believer. — Wosret
That last sentence is false. They both make the mistake of deciding the worth of the life of everyone, and everyone yet to be, rather than recognising that people have some say in the matter. They are both guilty of a sweeping generalisation. — Sapientia
Not if you're including passing moments and phases. If we all strongly and consistently wanted never to have been born, then that would change things, yes. — Sapientia
By having a child, one is granting them the opportunity to experience worthwhile things. — Sapientia
And, given that most people, throughout multiple generations, would say that they are glad to be alive, and that they do not regret being born, there is reason to believe that the yet-to-be-born stand a good chance of reaping the rewards and arriving at the same conclusion. — Sapientia
...but just having everyone die, or stop being born to fix the problem is like pulling out all of your teeth to prevent cavities. — Wosret
You're just using "cause" in a strained way. Like saying the big bang is the cause of suffering. — Wosret
But the antinatalist decides the worth of the life of no one, since you cannot decide the worth of the life of someone who isn't born (i.e. doesn't exist). — The Great Whatever
Okay, so is there some amount of people who have to not feel that way for birth to be justified? What is that amount? — The Great Whatever
But it isn't necessary that people experience worthwhile things. — Thorongil
You do not speak for the yet to be born. — Thorongil
The yet to be born have no say in the matter. — Thorongil
That conclusion is false and doesn't follow. Obviously, like I said, they decide the worth of life for everyone alive, and they also decide what the worth of life would be for everyone of a possible future generation, all else being equal. — Sapientia
Don't compare your life to others, and want more than most people have. Maybe most people are getting too much as it is. — Wosret
They both make the mistake of deciding the worth of the life of everyone, and everyone yet to be, rather than recognising that people have some say in the matter. — Sapientia
Because you're using them as reasons for having children? What, if not this, are you trying to say? — Thorongil
Preventing birth has no effect on anyone[...] — schopenhauer1
How out of touch with reality does one have to be to say that and mean it? — Sapientia
So the statement: "Preventing birth has no effect (or affect) on anyone" is being out of touch with reality? Since when does holding that view lead to such absurd, out of touch reactions? — schopenhauer1
Ok, shall we put it to the test? We could go out, put it to people, and gather feedback, but the results would predicably be in my favour, i.e. it's effect (or affect) would be to provoke a negative reaction. Most people will find it objectionable or absurd. Like something from a disturbing piece of fiction. — Sapientia
I don't get how you can acknowledge that the act of intentionally having a child affects people - pessimists and those who value life; but not acknowledge that the act of intentionally preventing child birth - a much more dramatic act if adopted on a large enough scale - also affects people. — Sapientia
If by saying that no one is affected, you mean only to refer to the absence of a baby - a potential prevented from being actualised, which, it is of course true, cannot be affected - then why speak of the affect on others in the former case, but not the latter?
That wouldn't be applying the same standard for some unknown and seemingly unjustified reason, i.e. special pleading. — Sapientia
The affect of what on others? Being born causes there to be an affect on the person being actualized. If no one is born, no actual person can be affected (though the possibility is there). We are simply discussing a life that may or may not be affected (by negative events). — schopenhauer1
It affects:
1.) The "minority" actual pessimists who reflect on life and value it as a not great by either seeing the negative of the the harms of life or the instrumentality/emptiness of our very own pursuits
2.) Those who value life as mediocre/good/great, but are yet still harmed by the events of life, contingencies of life, and the necessities of sustaining one's life. — schopenhauer1
It appears you cede my point about necessity. — Thorongil
That's good, but you're still stuck arrogating to yourself the ability to speak on behalf of the non-existent, an ability neither you nor anyone else possesses. — Thorongil
Were you just saying that it'll affect the child, whether it's a pessimist as described in "1.)" or someone who values life as described in "2.)"? — Sapientia
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.