7 ms·

Presumably the “others” referenced in the definition need to actually exist for you to lack consideration for them.

by aianus 6y ago

folkhack 6y ago
Agree. And in this situation I would define any potential child as part of the "others" as in "it's selfish for me to have a kid if I'm not prepared financially/emotionally."
aantix 6y ago
False. People take into consideration future people/events all of the time. It’s called planning.
- HelloMcFly 6y ago
  You know what future events I'm taking into consideration? Devastating climate change and what seems to be the decline of society more generally. I have real concerns about choosing to bring a child into a world that I feel so pessimistic about. That strikes me as thoughtful, not selfish. Though I have many selfish reasons for wanting to not have children, just as everyone who wants children has just as many selfish reasons themselves. I view neither of those things as "bad". Moreover, if I'm going to start considering the impact I have on future generations and people by procreating, where does it stop? Should we have 10 children? Does my duty stop at two when we're replacing ourselves? And given my level of commitment to local and national causes (financial and volunteer hours), does that offset ostensible selfishness of not having children? I'm passionate about helping this world despite having concerns about bringing anyone new into it.
  - aantix 6y ago
    Not even close. Donating money and volunteer hours are not the same as 24 hour care and responsibility for years on end. They aren’t offsetting. You’re skipping the very hard work of it all, and justly, missing the reward too.
    - HelloMcFly 6y ago
      I congratulate you for convincing yourself that your desire to do the thing you really want to do - have children - is any less selfish than the decisions I've also chosen. I sincerely believe you've missed the point, and I wish you ill-luck on your moral crusade.

Presumably the “others” referenced in the definition need to actually exist for you to lack consideration for them.

by aianus 6y ago

Presumably the “others” referenced in the definition need to actually exist for you to lack consideration for them.

Agree. And in this situation I would define any potential child as part of the "others" as in "it's selfish for me to have a kid if I'm not prepared financially/emotionally."

aantix 6y ago

False. People take into consideration future people/events all of the time. It’s called planning.

HelloMcFly 6y ago
You know what future events I'm taking into consideration? Devastating climate change and what seems to be the decline of society more generally. I have real concerns about choosing to bring a child into a world that I feel so pessimistic about. That strikes me as thoughtful, not selfish. Though I have many selfish reasons for wanting to not have children, just as everyone who wants children has just as many selfish reasons themselves. I view neither of those things as "bad". Moreover, if I'm going to start considering the impact I have on future generations and people by procreating, where does it stop? Should we have 10 children? Does my duty stop at two when we're replacing ourselves? And given my level of commitment to local and national causes (financial and volunteer hours), does that offset ostensible selfishness of not having children? I'm passionate about helping this world despite having concerns about bringing anyone new into it.
- aantix 6y ago
  Not even close. Donating money and volunteer hours are not the same as 24 hour care and responsibility for years on end. They aren’t offsetting. You’re skipping the very hard work of it all, and justly, missing the reward too.
  - HelloMcFly 6y ago
    I congratulate you for convincing yourself that your desire to do the thing you really want to do - have children - is any less selfish than the decisions I've also chosen. I sincerely believe you've missed the point, and I wish you ill-luck on your moral crusade.