Antinatalism

[divinemistress36]

My neighbor has 5 kids and I asked my mom today why do people have so many kids when at least one or 2 of them is bound to suffer in life? And all she could say is oh they are being raised fine and children are a blessing. It made me realize most people are naive to how much suffering all this procreating is doing..

 

[derpyderpins]

On one hand, I understand what you're saying, and I definitely see people who I don't think should be having any kids shoot out several. On the other hand, it's important to remember that just because we are miserable that is not how the world as a whole is. Most people actually enjoy life to an extent.

 

[FuneralCry]

Procreation to me truly is the most terrible tragedy, it disgusts me how they force life here even know there is never a need for existing at all with nobody able to suffer from not existing yet there is literally no limit as to how torturous existing can get. Procreation is beyond selfish, it's horrific how they impose potentially decades of meaningless suffering onto others, all that procreation does is cause immense harm.

 

[divinemistress36]

On one hand, I understand what you're saying, and I definitely see people who I don't think should be having any kids shoot out several. On the other hand, it's important to remember that just because we are miserable that is not how the world as a whole is. Most people actually enjoy life to an extent.

True but 5 kids thats just to much

 

[ThatGuyOverThere]

It's an orthodoxy, so why would they even consider questioning it, they are raised to believe that life is precious and a gift. So they have absolutely no reason for them to even consider any thing other wise, They can't conceive of something they were raised up to believe being wrong, when the people who told them this are of a moral authority be they: Teachers, Parents, Therapists or Doctors.

It's been drilled into them from a young age, so that from their perspective is seems like a no brainer, which is why even if you where to try to inform these people they irrationally shun you. It Is useless, it's basically Stockholm syndrome to an idea, instead of a person.

 

[Vicolo cieco]

The vast majority of people never question the morality of their actions, especially if those actions involve pleasure (e.g. sex). Antinatalism is irrefutable from a theoretical standpoint. I've yet to find someone who can disprove David Benatar's asymmetry.

 

[divinemistress36]

 

[thenamingofcats]

The cost of supporting 5 kids these days has got to be eye watering.

 

[Abandoned Character]

Personally, based on how have felt my entire life, I would not willingly pass on the torch of consciousness to future generations. I would rather foster, or adopt children before I even consider procreating my own.

 

[AngelicGirl]

I wonder what it'll take for the majority to recognize that this world isn't all it's cracked up to be. You know what, probably nothing will change that but I'd imagine that most would only change through literally having to go through immense type of suffering themselves. But then at that point is it even really worth it?

 

[divinemistress36]

I wonder what it'll take for the majority to recognize that this world isn't all it's cracked up to be. You know what, probably nothing will change that but I'd imagine that most would only change through literally having to go through immense type of suffering themselves. But then at that point is it even really worth it?

People are run by blind optimism and have kids to try to feel the empty void in their life

 

[black and white]

never seen the movie idiocracy? it's kind of a stupid comedy; but the main idea is clearly relevant especially in our world where things are going worst at every levels (environement, economy, ressources, international politics etc).

It's dumb and selfish to make children, especially now. Offer the so-called gift of life..... Actually the biggest chance is to offer them a dystopic world where they will be slaved, driven by AI and progressively starve and suffocate.... What a gift...

And parents raving on how much it's wonderful to make children:
1-we're not in the 20th century anymore
2-their life was probably empty to find so wonderful to take responsabilities of children sacrificing your entire life to make them eat and go study.
3-wonderful what? you spend more time at work than really raising them, few weeks of holiday in a year with your children? this is the idea of a wonderful life? School is educating them, society is educating them, social medias are educating them... You, you pay for them mostly.
etc

 

[ijustwishtodie]

On one hand, I understand what you're saying, and I definitely see people who I don't think should be having any kids shoot out several. On the other hand, it's important to remember that just because we are miserable that is not how the world as a whole is. Most people actually enjoy life to an extent.

This is why I'm not fully antinatalist despite agreeing with a lot of antinatalist related arguments. In the end, the way to approach the issue regarding people like me who don't enjoy life isn't to claim that procreation is immoral but rather to allow euthanasia for those who have suffered a lot and don't enjoy life at all. Of course it would be better if I was never born but, in the reality that we are in, I have been born and so, instead of thinking about how procreation is immoral, I should instead be allowed a peaceful way out of here because no amount of thinking that "oh I wish I wasn't born; my parents are immoral for having me" isn't going to magically make me not be born

 

[Slough Walker]

I agree with the asymmetry argument for antinatalism. Imagine the best life of the Renaissance era: Being born a prince with wealth, charisma, and brilliance, with the immense additional luck of enlightened and noble parents and suffering no diseases until very old age by 1300's-1500's standards. The fact remains that our hypothetical prince who came into existence then was deprived of all future goods upon his death. He never enjoyed the internet, automobiles, or flight. News and messages in his day traveled slowly, even with a personal army of message runners. A poor person alive today has access to orders of magnitude more entertainment and of greater quality than our prince.

In fairness, however, the prince had temporal power over many other people, especially compared to today. A Renaissance prince was well and truly above the law in ways that even comtemporary billionaries aren't. Upon ceasing to exist, our prince loses that temporal power. The prince is dead and by definition is no longer aware of the loss, but the loss still accrues to the once-living prince. That loss to the prince may be to the gain of the prince's subjects, but the prince wouldn't see it that way. If the prince simply hadn't come into existence, there never would have been a prince to suffer any of these losses. Hence the assymetry of benefits and costs of coming into existence v/s never coming into existence.