Looks like the aim is at you. Enjoy the spotlight. I think you can easily handle it. — universeness
No one gets to experience anything good then either do they? — Benj96
Would you be satisfied taking away all the people in love (with eachother, with their kids, with their jobs, with food, entertainment friends etc, people living their life the best they can and enjoying it) just for the sake of not existing at all? — Benj96
Sounds super boring tbh. — Benj96
Impositions, even small ones, are generally regarded as immoral. Birth is one giant imposition.
Does it matter whether the imposition is made with the individual's best interest at heart? I don't think so. — Tzeentch
Thanks for the interesting exchange. I'm away offline for a while to do some other stuff and lick all those wounds you inflicted on me. — universeness
To me the central question of antinatalism isn't whether people should or shouldn't experience all of those things, but whether an individual should get to decide on another's behalf that they should. — Tzeentch
Impositions, even small ones, are generally regarded as immoral. Birth is one giant imposition. — Tzeentch
Not a problem for anyone, literally, is it? — schopenhauer1
I’m not taking away anything from anyone. But if you explore that implication you would be facing problems of using peoples suffering for personal gains. That’s your arguments problem though, not ANs. — schopenhauer1
Re-emergence of species is well documented by biologists. So the argument would just be postponed until next time wouldnt it — Benj96
But they have a choice in that case dont they. To improve or worsen the situation. — Benj96
And a good physically world is an acceptable reason to want to exist. Its our choice whether we do that. — Benj96
Yes that's why we have a moral imperative if we want to exist to help eachother. Then you're not deciding to exist instead of someone else but through them, with them — Benj96
But a baby is born and its existence somehow already imposes on others through no fault of their own. — Benj96
If I impose something on you, with the intention of "helping you through it", that doesn't suddenly make my act of imposing any less immoral. — Tzeentch
The baby bears no blame, of course. The parents do. To me, antinatalism is about the choice to have children, not about what to do when the child is already there. — Tzeentch
Not the AN issue. — schopenhauer1
That does not change the nature of an imposition. — Tzeentch
The baby bears no blame, of course. The parents do. To me, antinatalism is about the choice to have children, not about what to do when the child is already there.
24m — Tzeentch
Parents were babies once too. So at what point does the blameless/innocent baby become guilty and shameful? — Benj96
All of nature seems to agree that reproduction is not only permissible but necessary. — Benj96
As for whether two loving parents want to bring a lovely little baby into their happy lives or not, that's their business. — Benj96
I don't think anyone should have that sort of autocratic power over whether others live or die. — Benj96
The point at which they decide to have children. — Tzeentch
Again, I'm coming at this from an angle that is only concerned with the choice of the parents to create a child, and whether that is a moral action. — Tzeentch
So people are innocent in their entire life all the way up to the point that they procreate and then they're criminal/deserve shame and guilt etc? — Benj96
To believe its immoral to have children is to believe you're incapable of being a good parent no? — Benj96
Whether it's A and B's business to decide whether C shall live I find questionable. But at the very least C ought to be consulted, which is impossible, hence the dilemma. — Tzeentch
Well perhaps elaborate more so I can understand exactly what you believe? — Benj96
Impositions, even small ones, are generally regarded as immoral. Birth is one giant imposition. — Tzeentch
Whether it's A and B's business to decide whether C shall live I find questionable. But at the very least C ought to be consulted, which is impossible, hence the dilemma. — Tzeentch
It's not a really a dilemma because we can't "consult nature" and ask if we can have a chat with our non existent child as to whether it wants to be born before it is. How would something non existent know what existing is like to make an informed decision?. — Benj96
We create, in good faith, as an exercise in trust that we can bring into existence something that offers good purpose - more beauty, more knowledge, more understanding, more benefit. — Benj96
If a parent is certain their child will be an awful monster for whatever reason then yes it's likely they wouldn't procreate. But how on earth can a parent know that in foresight? — Benj96
We can only blame the environment, teachings and beliefs we instill in our children. We can teach them to be racists, we can teach them to be selfish, to manipulate etc or other people could teach them that if we are too passive in our role. Parents do their best. Sometimes it's enough. Sometimes it's not. — Benj96
Where would your antinatalism argument be if we developed a tech that allowed transhumans to reproduce asexually? — universeness
It's not a dilemma to you that you don't know whether someone consents before making a monumental decision on their behalf? — Tzeentch
It would be exactly the same, with the same critical questions asked to whomever decides another being should be thrown into the crucible of life. — Tzeentch
possibly a lifetime of suffering on another. — Tzeentch
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.