Thoughts on Antinatalism?

[DeadbeatDaughter]

"the philosophical value judgment that procreation is unethical or unjustifiable."

I once saw a YouTube video called voluntary extinction, that talks about it. Although very realistically, a hypothetical "voluntary extinction" is completely..well, impossible. It's not something that would ever happen, the philosophical beliefs of every person honestly varies so much especially when it comes to the topics of procreation. There's obviously no more than a small group of people who even agree with Antinatalism to begin with.

The idea is that you could spare someone the unnecessary pain of life, by keeping that person inexistent. Many people on this forum can probably agree, if having been given the choice of life, knowing what would come of it...you might have chosen to skip this experience.

Well then some argue, what about the good in life? Doesn't the good in life make the misery worth it? Well that's something else that's likely going to vary person to person. But what does the good mean...when it's not guaranteed? There is a chance everyone will have a good life. But there is a guarantee that everyone will experience misery. Hunger, boredom, sadness. Grief, heartbreak, disease.

Is it worth it to be brought into existence, if there's (let's just say) a solid %50 chance of experiencing all the misery. Whereas inexistence offers %100 avoidance of misery. What is really best for life at stake? And if that life could choose....would they really chose to be brought into a world that will absolutely cause misery? Misfortune? Very likely, depression. Especially in the world of today. Is it not a selfish, almost cruel, decision to make for someone? To decide they will have to bare the burden of life?

 

[U. A.]

You need to reply to this thread or react to this post in order to see this content.

 

[Forever Sleep]

I am an anti-natilist personally. I don't hate all parents. It's more a hope they can give their child what it needs and a dread that they may not or that something will happen that they had no control over.

By that principle though- I have to agree that it's morally questionable to birth children- because they are exposing that lifeform to KNOWN danger. Some of which they have no control over preventing.

I suppose it's being aware that's the problem. We don't expect animals to go anti-natilist because we largely assume they live according to primal instincts. We can think and reason though. We aren't so bound to those primal drives. Otherwise- we wouldn't be able to suicide either. I suppose I have the feeling that we ought to know better!

There again- if a person hasn't suffered greatly in their life or, they've been able to overcome problems relatively easily- I also wonder if it's reasonable to expect them to truly appreciate what they might be exposing their child to.

There again- none of us live under a rock! We know about all the numerous illnesses we are prone to- at any age. We know lots of people experience bullying and abuse. We've heard of rape and murder. We know what the state of the economy and job market is. We know life isn't exactly fair. It does truly perplex me that seeing and knowing and living through all that- people still think: 'What a great place to bring a child into!'

I suppose that touches on something else though. I tend to think would- be parents aren't solely focussed on that. As in- How will my child fair in this world? I think their desire to procreate is because THEY want it. They want to experience that (hopefully) loving bond. It will give them pleasure to watch their child (hopefully) enjoy the fun things in life. They maybe want offspring who will take up their (failed) ambitions or, who will look after them in old age. They maybe think being a parent will give them new purpose in life. But- all of that stuff is selfish need. At best- it's an exchange. Will you look after me, if I look after you? Why is that something to be admired though?

I suppose that's the other thing. REALLY incredible parents sometimes stand out. When- should they? Shouldn't that just be the norm? What kind of job is any of us going to do? I doubt I'd be a neglectful or abusive parent but- if my offspring grew up with all the same pessimism and insecurity I have- which of course- they likely would. How on earth would I teach optimism and confidence? Chances are though- they'll have ended up suffering in the same way I have. Why would I want that for them? So- on an individual basis too- I think we should be thinking about what we can really give children and where we might not be all that great for them.

I suppose I'm more grateful than anything else- that I was too uggly to attract a man when I was younger. It's not impossible I would have had children back then. I have this weird love for my unborn children tucked up safe and away in non existence. I feel like I'm the best, most protective Mum I could be by not being one in the first place! My children will never bet bullied, abused, bereaved and die.

I've seen the argument presented as numerical figures. Where non existence is 0 and life is either +1 or -1. So that's really the question I suppose. Is it worth risking a minus score over a zero? Ultimately- it's a lottery. If we were all so convinced that a win is worth the risk- we'd all be playing with all of our money every week. But- we won't risk that much misfortune when it affects us. Put another way- we walk up to someone in the street with a button. They can choose to walk away or press the button. If they press the button, they will either be handed a million pounds or, they will contract Sickle Cell Disease. Maybe not a great example because those already suffering may well still risk it and press it but I imagine most wouldn't want to risk that chance. Especially if they aren't told the odds. Ironic then, that we'll expose our children to terrible odds sometimes and still claim to love them.

I suppose to be fair though- can we absolutely call non existence a minus score? Do we absolutely know there isn't some kind of consciousness before or after death? I tend to think there isn't so- that equation makes sense to me. Having no awareness in pre existence means we can't feel envy of those who have life. Why risk that peace for a totally unknown variable? On the off chance they may be ok?

 

[orvreader]

Based on my limited understanding of anti-natalism, I personally disagree. I think people should be born into this world, it's just that they should also be freely allowed to leave.

 

[DeadbeatDaughter]

I have this weird love for my unborn children tucked up safe and away in non existence. I feel like I'm the best, most protective Mum I could be by not being one in the first place! My children will never bet bullied, abused, bereaved and die.

Couldn't have said it better. When I look at conversations between antinatalists it often seems like alot of them foster this very deep affection for children they're never going to have, me included.