6 ms·

> whether to start trying to have a family is a BIG-ASS decision, with life-long consequences It especially has life-long consequences for the children! I woul

> whether to start trying to have a family is a BIG-ASS decision, with life-long consequences It especially has life-long consequences for the children! I wouldn't want to put children in this world. I don't think the future world is a nice place to grow up in, even the current world isn't. IMO it's selfish to make kids just to feel fulfilled and not be lonely.

lqet 6y ago
> I wouldn't want to put children in this world. I don't think the future world is a nice place to grow up in, even the current world isn't. I have posted the following a few years ago: > My ancestors thought it was okay to have kids during times in which many scholars where certain the apocalypse was due in the next 25 years, during periods in which the plague killed more than half of the population, during the 30 years war and in a time when there was a realistic chance of nuclear annihilation in the next 10 years. I am glad they did. Today, as a father, I would add: as a potential parent, you are in no position to decide that your future children, grandchildren or great^x-grandchildren won't be glad to be alive. You don't know them, and most importantly you do not know and you cannot know about their world. In my opinion, this argument is nothing more but a convenient excuse to avoid the stress of bringing up kids. It is a valid reason to not want any kids because of the stress, but please don't rationalize yourself into peace of conscience by assuming that you can look into the future.
- zeepzeep 6y ago
  > assuming that you can look into the future. That's why I said "even the current world isn't".
  - lqet 6y ago
    But you don't bring kids into this world. You bring them into the world of the future, even if this future is only 9 months away.
  - ddorian43 6y ago
    Do you want to live in this world ?
- donjohn 6y ago
  > My ancestors thought it was okay to have kids during [bad times]. The desire to make Descendants in hard times is a natural reaction. In more peaceful times you have more time to think about it logicality.
- bing_dai 6y ago
  "> My ancestors thought it was okay to have kids during times in which many scholars where certain the apocalypse was due in the next 25 years, during periods in which the plague killed more than half of the population, during the 30 years war and in a time when there was a realistic chance of nuclear annihilation in the next 10 years. I am glad they did." In my opinion, your ancestors had children largely because they had intercourse without accessing to birth control, not because they made a conscious decision to have children despite the circumstances.
- depr 6y ago
  You are rationalizing in the same way in the other direction
ddorian43 6y ago
So we should end civilization ?
- zeepzeep 6y ago
  Yes
  - sdwa 6y ago
    Then most would agree that misanthropes such as yourself should absolutely not have children and we all support your decision.
- lazyjones 6y ago
  No, we can just let the nihilistic and self-centered people go extinct. It's good for the gene pool.
  - menybuvico 6y ago
    The irony in all this is that fertility tends to drop amongst people considered successful and (mostly) progressive, meaning that conservative unsuccessful people will out-breed them. One would think that the logical thing to do if you're rich and successful would be to have many kids, and see if it's due to genetic factors.
    - majewsky 6y ago
      > The irony in all this is that fertility tends to drop amongst people considered successful and (mostly) progressive, meaning that conservative unsuccessful people will out-breed them. If this argument really holds, why has the world become so much more progressive over the last two centuries?
      - lazyjones 6y ago
        > why has the world become so much more progressive over the last two centuries? It only became so progressive since the 1970's, the 50's were fine. The reason: drugs.
brazzy 6y ago
> IMO it's selfish to make kids just to feel fulfilled and not be lonely. You can paint pretty much any action as selfish by using this "just to make yourself feel good" angle. It's a meaningless non-argument.
- zeepzeep 6y ago
  But usually it doesn't affect others. Maybe selfish is the wrong word. I mean you got positive feelings while some others might have negative feelings because of you.
- samhain 6y ago
  You're right, it's not a very good argument. It's just like someone saying that not having children is selfish. Both aren't very good arguments. It would be better to use some other kind of metric, like overall happiness vs suffering, perhaps like antinatalism attempts to do. For example, someone who enjoys working all the time, might see that as a boon for their children, and so decide that overall, it's better to have kids. While someone who doesn't like work might decide to empathize with their unborn children and decide it would be a blessing not to have them. Very subjective, but more well grounded arguments for each persons' decision.
jules 6y ago
Was there, in your opinion, a time in history when the world was a nice place to grow up in? When and where?
ako 6y ago
If your parents were deciding right now if they wanted to create you or not, would you tell them that you do not want to exist?
- zeepzeep 6y ago
  Yes. Would have caused less pain on both sides.
  - ako 6y ago
    Really sorry to read that, pretty sad.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
  Yeah, probably.
jonwinstanley 6y ago
If sensible people refuse to have children and morons continue to have several, then we will be in an even worse situation down the line
- godfreyantonell 6y ago
  Amen. Why is it that morons and the evil seem to be the most fertile? I have no science to back this up. This is just something I have observed from personal experience.
  - symlinkk 6y ago
    Because they don’t think things through (morons) or don’t care (evil). Have you seen the movie Idiocracy? It covers this pretty well: https://youtu.be/icmRCixQrx8 https://youtu.be/icmRCixQrx8
scottLobster 6y ago
You realize there's probably never been a better time to be alive except for maybe 50 years ago, right? (depending on which part of the world you're in) Yes life continues to be harsh, brutal and tragic. It always has been and in some ways always will be. But if your kids are doomed to live in merely the 2nd best civilization humanity has ever produced, I don't think they have much to complain about relatively speaking. The argument you put forth would have us end the species if everyone agreed to it. And I don't agree we should end human existence and squander all our potential in a fit of depressive nihilism anymore then you should sell all your stocks the moment the market goes down for a day. It's more selfish IMO to make yourself the arbiter of your unborn childrens' future, denying them the chance at a good life just because you want to make it easier on yourself. Not saying you should have kids if you're not ready, but don't use the state of the world as an excuse. All your ancestors are laughing at how spoiled you are.
- mf_tomb 6y ago
  Potential children don't exist. They cannot be harmed by not existing. They can, however, be harmed by being brought into existence. This is true even if life is "worth living" or "generally good" or "mostly pleasurable". Depression and nihilism has nothing to do with it, and my ancestors also don't exist anymore, so why would I care about their opinions?
  - scottLobster 6y ago
    They exist as potential, the same way the rock at the top of hill has a certain amount of potential energy. You choose whether to push the rock down the hill or not, and declaring that the rock will absolutely be harmed to an unacceptable degree, when it's foggy and you can't see even 10 feet down the hill, is irrational. Especially given that billions of other rocks have been pushed down much steeper hills with extremely rough slopes in the past and still managed. When we're talking about humans instead of rocks, being harmed is part of life. At the end of the day we're all harmed by something that ends up killing us. That doesn't make life worthless, and attempting to prevent harm at all costs is the definition of maladaptive behavior. If that's your argument then you're basically the ultimate helicopter parent. You're so worried that your child might get harmed you won't even let them be born. Reward requires risk, and greater rewards require greater risks. That's true for every lifeform down to bacteria and viruses. Granted not all risk leads to reward, but the risk of parenting tends to reward those involved above a certain baseline of effort and capability. As for your ancestors, you're descended from a line of beings stretching back millions of years that, whatever their flaws, managed to reproduce. If there is a point to life that we know about it's that life exists to propagate in harmony with nature (often brutally enforced by various aspects of nature). The point of society is that we all help each other in that endeavor and make it more meaningful. To fulfill our potential as a species. Even those who choose not to have children help in some way through jobs and taxes. This is part of the reason helping others makes us feel good. There are many valid reasons to not have kids, but I don't understand how you can trust someone who says "I don't want to succeed at the basic function of life because the 2nd best civilization ever produced just isn't comfortable enough for me", and means it. Someone with that level of weakness is not going to be reliable in bad times, regardless of their intentions. Maybe you don't care if I trust you or not, but if you don't care if anyone trusts you... well then I hope your life is as comfortable as you clearly require, because you'll be getting by on charity if it's not.

lqet 6y ago

> I wouldn't want to put children in this world. I don't think the future world is a nice place to grow up in, even the current world isn't. I have posted the following a few years ago: > My ancestors thought it was okay to have kids during times in which many scholars where certain the apocalypse was due in the next 25 years, during periods in which the plague killed more than half of the population, during the 30 years war and in a time when there was a realistic chance of nuclear annihilation in the next 10 years. I am glad they did. Today, as a father, I would add: as a potential parent, you are in no position to decide that your future children, grandchildren or great^x-grandchildren won't be glad to be alive. You don't know them, and most importantly you do not know and you cannot know about their world. In my opinion, this argument is nothing more but a convenient excuse to avoid the stress of bringing up kids. It is a valid reason to not want any kids because of the stress, but please don't rationalize yourself into peace of conscience by assuming that you can look into the future.

zeepzeep 6y ago
> assuming that you can look into the future. That's why I said "even the current world isn't".
- lqet 6y ago
  But you don't bring kids into this world. You bring them into the world of the future, even if this future is only 9 months away.
- ddorian43 6y ago
  Do you want to live in this world ?
donjohn 6y ago
> My ancestors thought it was okay to have kids during [bad times]. The desire to make Descendants in hard times is a natural reaction. In more peaceful times you have more time to think about it logicality.
bing_dai 6y ago
"> My ancestors thought it was okay to have kids during times in which many scholars where certain the apocalypse was due in the next 25 years, during periods in which the plague killed more than half of the population, during the 30 years war and in a time when there was a realistic chance of nuclear annihilation in the next 10 years. I am glad they did." In my opinion, your ancestors had children largely because they had intercourse without accessing to birth control, not because they made a conscious decision to have children despite the circumstances.
depr 6y ago
You are rationalizing in the same way in the other direction

ddorian43 6y ago

So we should end civilization ?

zeepzeep 6y ago
Yes
- sdwa 6y ago
  Then most would agree that misanthropes such as yourself should absolutely not have children and we all support your decision.
lazyjones 6y ago
No, we can just let the nihilistic and self-centered people go extinct. It's good for the gene pool.
- menybuvico 6y ago
  The irony in all this is that fertility tends to drop amongst people considered successful and (mostly) progressive, meaning that conservative unsuccessful people will out-breed them. One would think that the logical thing to do if you're rich and successful would be to have many kids, and see if it's due to genetic factors.
  - majewsky 6y ago
    > The irony in all this is that fertility tends to drop amongst people considered successful and (mostly) progressive, meaning that conservative unsuccessful people will out-breed them. If this argument really holds, why has the world become so much more progressive over the last two centuries?
    - lazyjones 6y ago
      > why has the world become so much more progressive over the last two centuries? It only became so progressive since the 1970's, the 50's were fine. The reason: drugs.

brazzy 6y ago

> IMO it's selfish to make kids just to feel fulfilled and not be lonely. You can paint pretty much any action as selfish by using this "just to make yourself feel good" angle. It's a meaningless non-argument.

zeepzeep 6y ago
But usually it doesn't affect others. Maybe selfish is the wrong word. I mean you got positive feelings while some others might have negative feelings because of you.
samhain 6y ago
You're right, it's not a very good argument. It's just like someone saying that not having children is selfish. Both aren't very good arguments. It would be better to use some other kind of metric, like overall happiness vs suffering, perhaps like antinatalism attempts to do. For example, someone who enjoys working all the time, might see that as a boon for their children, and so decide that overall, it's better to have kids. While someone who doesn't like work might decide to empathize with their unborn children and decide it would be a blessing not to have them. Very subjective, but more well grounded arguments for each persons' decision.

jules 6y ago

Was there, in your opinion, a time in history when the world was a nice place to grow up in? When and where?

ako 6y ago

If your parents were deciding right now if they wanted to create you or not, would you tell them that you do not want to exist?

zeepzeep 6y ago
Yes. Would have caused less pain on both sides.
- ako 6y ago
  Really sorry to read that, pretty sad.
AnIdiotOnTheNet 6y ago
Yeah, probably.

jonwinstanley 6y ago

If sensible people refuse to have children and morons continue to have several, then we will be in an even worse situation down the line

godfreyantonell 6y ago
Amen. Why is it that morons and the evil seem to be the most fertile? I have no science to back this up. This is just something I have observed from personal experience.
- symlinkk 6y ago
  Because they don’t think things through (morons) or don’t care (evil). Have you seen the movie Idiocracy? It covers this pretty well: https://youtu.be/icmRCixQrx8 https://youtu.be/icmRCixQrx8

scottLobster 6y ago

You realize there's probably never been a better time to be alive except for maybe 50 years ago, right? (depending on which part of the world you're in) Yes life continues to be harsh, brutal and tragic. It always has been and in some ways always will be. But if your kids are doomed to live in merely the 2nd best civilization humanity has ever produced, I don't think they have much to complain about relatively speaking. The argument you put forth would have us end the species if everyone agreed to it. And I don't agree we should end human existence and squander all our potential in a fit of depressive nihilism anymore then you should sell all your stocks the moment the market goes down for a day. It's more selfish IMO to make yourself the arbiter of your unborn childrens' future, denying them the chance at a good life just because you want to make it easier on yourself. Not saying you should have kids if you're not ready, but don't use the state of the world as an excuse. All your ancestors are laughing at how spoiled you are.

mf_tomb 6y ago
Potential children don't exist. They cannot be harmed by not existing. They can, however, be harmed by being brought into existence. This is true even if life is "worth living" or "generally good" or "mostly pleasurable". Depression and nihilism has nothing to do with it, and my ancestors also don't exist anymore, so why would I care about their opinions?
- scottLobster 6y ago
  They exist as potential, the same way the rock at the top of hill has a certain amount of potential energy. You choose whether to push the rock down the hill or not, and declaring that the rock will absolutely be harmed to an unacceptable degree, when it's foggy and you can't see even 10 feet down the hill, is irrational. Especially given that billions of other rocks have been pushed down much steeper hills with extremely rough slopes in the past and still managed. When we're talking about humans instead of rocks, being harmed is part of life. At the end of the day we're all harmed by something that ends up killing us. That doesn't make life worthless, and attempting to prevent harm at all costs is the definition of maladaptive behavior. If that's your argument then you're basically the ultimate helicopter parent. You're so worried that your child might get harmed you won't even let them be born. Reward requires risk, and greater rewards require greater risks. That's true for every lifeform down to bacteria and viruses. Granted not all risk leads to reward, but the risk of parenting tends to reward those involved above a certain baseline of effort and capability. As for your ancestors, you're descended from a line of beings stretching back millions of years that, whatever their flaws, managed to reproduce. If there is a point to life that we know about it's that life exists to propagate in harmony with nature (often brutally enforced by various aspects of nature). The point of society is that we all help each other in that endeavor and make it more meaningful. To fulfill our potential as a species. Even those who choose not to have children help in some way through jobs and taxes. This is part of the reason helping others makes us feel good. There are many valid reasons to not have kids, but I don't understand how you can trust someone who says "I don't want to succeed at the basic function of life because the 2nd best civilization ever produced just isn't comfortable enough for me", and means it. Someone with that level of weakness is not going to be reliable in bad times, regardless of their intentions. Maybe you don't care if I trust you or not, but if you don't care if anyone trusts you... well then I hope your life is as comfortable as you clearly require, because you'll be getting by on charity if it's not.