esoterispeec
Student
- Nov 20, 2020
- 130
for those who don't know what Antinatalism is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antinatalism
Making bodies in the first place is kinda the ultimate example of that tho. When you procreate you're basically consigning the poor bastard to a lifetime of toil and you can never get consent beforehand.No, because I don't believe in any ideology that wants to tell other people what to do with their bodies.
You are assuming that every person will suffer and projecting your situation, when in reality the vast majority of people are not suicidal and are content with living.Making bodies in the first place is kinda the ultimate example of that tho. When you procreate you're basically consigning the poor bastard to a lifetime of toil and you can never get consent beforehand.
So, yeah, total antinatalist here. Easiest moral dilemma there ever was for me.
I'm not assuming anything. I'm saying that if you have a kid you're making them come here without their consent. If you don't have a kid then no one exists to oppose to being left in nonexistence and you're not making a choice for anyone. People who don't want to force shit on other people should be antinatalists.You are assuming that every person will suffer and projecting your situation, when in reality the vast majority of people are not suicidal and are content with living.
Besides, you are ignoring the fact that the reproductive instinct is something so strong that it happens to every single creature and even goes to the cellular level. So, are you going to stop just at humans? animals can suffer far more than us, are they immoral because they don't follow your arbitrary morals?
Antinatalism is a very reductive answer to a far more complicated question.
I'm not assuming anything. I'm saying that if you have a kid you're making them come here without their consent. If you don't have a kid then no one exists to oppose to being left in nonexistence and you're not making a choice for anyone. People who don't want to force shit on other people should be antinatalists.
I'm also not ignoring anything about animals. Animals don't get brought up in discussions about morality because they can't be reasoned out of their positions. Do you also bring up animals when someone brings up the immorality of murder or theft or whatever else. It's a weird thing to say.
I don't even believe in an objective morality. I'm not offended if someone doesn't believe in antinatalism. But if it was up to me I'd totally make everything in this universe unable to bear offspring.
You are misinterpreting my point about consent, I said that it can only exist in our modern world and I stand by it, I ultimately believe in freedom and it includes reproductive freedom, same with the freedom to choose not to live. And those are entirely human concepts as well, they can only be sustained in our modern environment.@Fragile
Lmao now you're denigrating consent when you were the one who first brought up your unease with telling people what to do with their bodies. People go to the weirdest lengths and give up so much they usually cling to just to escape the logic of antinatalism.
You never need to ask a nonexistent person anything if you just leave them in nonexistence. That's the point. That's the great boon of antinatalism. You're not forcing anything on anyone.
I wouldn't care all that much about taking away someone's ability to do stuff without consent, yes. Antinatalism is the only option where consent is never violated.
An ideology doesn't have to be perfectly executable to be a worthwhile ideology. It's like complaining about laws against murder because you can't totally eradicate it.
What logic?People go to the weirdest lengths and give up so much they usually cling to just to escape the logic of antinatalism.
Hey! don't assume that, I've read far more than it, and that article is very biased since it includes virtually no criticism of the idea, as opposed to many other philosophical articles that have an extensive section about its criticism and detractors.Only in the same sense I'm a vegan, which is I believe the arguments are sound, but I wouldn't put it past me to refuse the sacrifice.
For example, right now I recognize @Fragile isn't arguing on a philosophical level and I'd advise them to at least read the Wikipedia page on the topic. But just like I still eat meat, I could see myself deciding to impose the burden of existence on someone if I get to middle age, decide to stick around and have nothing else to look forward to.
Morality is subjective, I just believe that I shouldn't force mine upon others.The reasoning if the word logic triggers you. In the real world every action forces something on someone else. Putting a stop to the whole universe would in the end still violate the consent of infinitely less creatures than it existing forever.
You totally gave up any kind of morality for some handwavy nonsense about nature and you didn't even notice it.
Now we're getting somewhere.The reasoning if the word logic triggers you. In the real world every action forces something on someone else. Putting a stop to the whole universe would in the end still violate the consent of infinitely less creatures than it existing forever.
Yeah, actually I'm sorry for growing frustrated. There was no need for that. I hope it didn't affect your mood too much. Thanks for the discussion.Morality is subjective, I just believe that I shouldn't force mine upon others.
I see that you are growing increasingly frustrated with this, so I'll leave it at that, but it was a nice little discussion!
Maybe we should start cock-blocking as much as possible.I'm an antinatalist but I'm not doing anything to prevent people from reproducing.
Don't worry about it, I just really enjoy discussing in general. And I know I made some weird arguments.Yeah, actually I'm sorry for growing frustrated. There was no need for that. I hope it didn't affect your mood too much. Thanks for the discussion.
I find it to be nothing more than "I wish I'd never been born. Also, you."for those who don't know what Antinatalism is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antinatalism
Antinatalism" is just yet another way to ensure that you get to be disappointed with everything every day: You wish you hadn't been born – tough shit, you were born and while you can kill yourself, you can't undo having been born. You wish people would stop having children – tough shit, people are going to keep on having children.
Well most people are unthinking idiots. Why should it matter whether they find any appeal in it? They won't find any appeal in any moral philosophical takes on life.Only chronic depressives find "antinatalism" to have any appeal whatsoever. To most people, it's just whiny, uninteresting fantasizing.
Being a philosophy isn't some lofty achievement and antinatalism definitely doesn't fall short of it. It's clearly a philosophical take. No doubt most of the people who're drawn to it are unhappy people. Doesn't really say anything about the worth of its arguments though.It's not a "philosophy", and it doesn't provide any insights. It's merely a value judgment made by people who are at the low end when it comes to capacity for feeling happy.
Well, no, to a large extent it is exactly because they haven't pondered on anything deep for more than two seconds in their life. If there being more suffering in life than happiness is a no-shit-sherlock take then those people probably need to do more philosophizing and realize that what makes life okay for them is being blind to its realities."Overall, life offers more suffering than benefit, therefore ..." No shit, Sherlock. And yet, most people are keen on it. Not because they haven't pondered your precious deep thoughts about mystery, but simply because whatever life offers is enough for them.