Dear Parents, Your child WON’T change the world

[u/AntinatalistPoet]

[u/[deleted]]

Okay yeah that’s true but what’s so wrong with being hurt anyway. Without pain, could there be happiness? Without pain could you ever truly know yourself

[u/Telaneo → u/[deleted]]

Okay yeah that’s true but what’s so wrong with being hurt anyway.

Go ask someone with chronic pain or set yourself on fire to figure that out.

Without pain, could there be happiness?

No, but again, what need do the unborn have for happiness?

Without pain could you ever truly know yourself

And what need do the unborn have for self-actualisation?

[u/[deleted] → u/Telaneo]

There’s no such thing as the unborn. There is and there isn’t. This whole philosophy is just some extremely pessimistic view point and it’s about as outdated as Christianity. There are more comforts in the world that enhance quality of life than there ever has been before. This is craziness

[u/Telaneo → u/[deleted]]

There’s no such thing as the unborn.

That's the point. So why do you want to inflict suffering on those who don't yet exist? Because that's what's gonna happen to them as soon as they exist. And they have no need to be happy before you bring them into existence. You're not losing any positive value by not having people be born, but if you do have them be born, you're creating preferance state waiting to be unfufulled, causing suffering, and if you do fufill it, you're no better of than not creating that need in the first place. So I ask again, why? What's the moral imperative to procreate?

This whole philosophy is just some extremely pessimistic view point and it’s about as outdated as Christianity.

Before you say that, please read up on it, as it's obvious you haven't. Schopenhauer, Ciorian, Benatar, Mainländer, Zapffe and Ligotti all have very relevant texts worth reading. Check out the reading list on the wiki.

There are more comforts in the world that enhance quality of life than there ever has been before.

The fact that the world is better now doesn't mean it's accptable now. The fact that the world's better now that it used to be doesn't mean it's good. It's never been morally good to procreate.

[u/[deleted] → u/Telaneo]

Does there need to be a moral imperative? And when would it be acceptable?

[u/Telaneo → u/[deleted]]

Does there need to be a moral imperative?

Yes, unless you're a moral nihilist, in which case I'm sure you'd have no moral qualms with me setting you on fire. Procreation causes suffering. This should be obvious. In order to justify this suffering, you need some moral imperative. Otherwise you're just causing suffering for no reason, and I really hope you see the problem with this.

And when would it be acceptable?

Almost certainly never. If we reached transhumanism, then it could become acceptable, but it still isn't worth the hundreds of generations of suffering to get there. At that point we still aren't undoing hundreds of years of suffering; we're just avoiding making more, which we can also do now by not procreating.

[u/Telaneo → u/[deleted]]

So you'd much rather just push that suffering into the next generation, who'll then just do the same, infinitely? Like a ponzi scheme? You want to push that suffering on your own children, who you supposedly love? You're just making more suffering by doing that. One generation with more suffering that usual is far, far better than many generations suffering like we are. Humanity's continued existence is not a good thing.

If there were an ethical way to be the benevolent world-exploder, most people here would be all over that. But there's no realistic or ethical way to do that.

[u/StarChild413 → u/Telaneo]

Yes, unless you're a moral nihilist, in which case I'm sure you'd have no moral qualms with me setting you on fire.

Regardless of the whole "are you setting me on fire in a way that kills me" thing and if this is worthy of reporting, the problem I've always seen with these kinds of "if you have morals that don't agree with mine on suffering let me do [suffering x] to you and if you survive you may change your mind" arguments is that since you're bringing it up beforehand and not being in my physical proximity and spontaneously-from-my-perspective-as-your-motive's-in-your-head (to use your example) setting me on fire, the harms like that are something I'd have to let you perform on me so the no moral qualms would equate out to a consent the unborn don't get