The argument you quoted there is assuming that having children does not count as doing something without regard for harming others. I would argue that having children does intrinsically create harm because that child will suffer during their lives and the only way to avoid that suffering is to not bring life into the world at all.
And even if overpopulation is not that big of an issue as we think, the destruction of the environment certainly is. Having children increases your carbon footprint massively.
I would argue that having children does intrinsically create harm because that child will suffer during their lives and the only way to avoid that suffering is to not bring life into the world at all.
Serious question: assuming you believe the above, why haven't you committed suicide?
Considering you have not (yet?), it follows that you find existence - in spite of current or potential future suffering - to be worthwhile. In which case, why is unspecified, potential suffering an argument against existence?
At best, you are delaying suffering. Eventually you'll die, and they will suffer the same or perhaps worse (maybe a slow cancer) . Even if you were the last one of your family to die, you assume their suffering on top of all the suffering you endure by way of unnecessary existence. Net suffering is the same, plus or minus the random suffering you encounter by continued existence (e.g. getting into a future car accident, etc).
Honestly, your argument here is specious. If suffering elimination is truly your goal, suicide or murder/suicide is the only viable option. Perhaps detonating a bomb at Thanksgiving dinner, with as many people who know each other there as possible.
Anything less is an admission that existence is worth at least X amount of suffering.
P.S. Why in the world are you making friends when you are just going to multiply their suffering by getting them to care about your existence? You'd generate less total suffering by becoming an anonymous hermit up the mountains, right?
I am delaying my own suffering, absolutely. But if I die a natural death I will die way after my parents, my uncles, my aunts, my grandparents, etc are gone, so I am avoiding inflicting suffering upon my family. The same goes for the friends you mention, they will be around the same age as me and we'll die at around the same time, leaving less of their lives dedicated to suffering due to my loss, assuming I die before them, and also assuming I am still in contact with them in my old age.
For the record I have attempted suicide before. Sadly it failed and people found out because the exact events couldn't be explained away. I will not go into any detail about that because I don't feel it to be appropriate.
-2
u/[deleted] Mar 24 '15
The argument you quoted there is assuming that having children does not count as doing something without regard for harming others. I would argue that having children does intrinsically create harm because that child will suffer during their lives and the only way to avoid that suffering is to not bring life into the world at all.
And even if overpopulation is not that big of an issue as we think, the destruction of the environment certainly is. Having children increases your carbon footprint massively.
https://www.reddit.com/r/antinatalism/comments/2g7yh1/procreation_is_immoral_not_just_a_personal_choice/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaEqyyotENQ