5 ms·
What does the heat death of the universe have to do with meaning? Just to apply reductio ad absurdum to the anti-natalism argument: If there was a virus that w
by 0-_-0 5y ago
What does the heat death of the universe have to do with meaning?
Just to apply reductio ad absurdum to the anti-natalism argument: If there was a virus that would prevent all animals and humans on the planet from reproducing, leading to the quick extinction of all consciousness, would that be a moral good?
- rgun 5y agoIt would not be "morally bad". It has just hastened the timeline for everything losing meaning (thousands/millions/billions of years from now -> now).
- 0-_-0 5y agoIf meaning is good, then wouldn't losing meaning be bad?
- kongin 5y agoIf it caused no other harm yes. Because you would still get to live a long life, just not inflict it on someone else.
- 0-_-0 5y agoWhy is living bad? Would you rather not live right now?
- kongin 5y agoKilling something alive is different to not creating a life. Asking me to kill myself is a rather poor attempt at a gotcha. The better question is why aren't you having children as often as possible if you think life is worth while. On average any fertile couple can produce around 12 children, if you're not on track to have that number of children but think that life is so grand then why aren't you? The difference between you and me is that you're ok with not creating 9 to 11 lives during your reproductive age, I'm ok with not creating 12.
- 0-_-0 5y agoWould you prefer to not have been born in the first place? I'll have enough children to sustain humanity and keep consciousness in the universe, having 2.1 children still means a potentially infinite line of descendants, so no reason to have 12. 12 would decrease the average well-being, while having none would decrease it as well. Also, I would be interested what you think the crucial difference is between not continuing to live and not being born.
- kongin 5y ago>Also, I would be interested what you think the crucial difference is between not continuing to live and not being born. It is the difference between killing two children and deciding to not have 10 extra ones.
- 0-_-0 5y agoThat makes no sense, since children want to live, so you can't apply the logic to children, only to yourself. So I ask you again, would you prefer not to have been born? And if yes, what's your argument for continuing your own life?
- kongin 5y agoPeople that don't exist have no wants. People that exist have wants. I exist, yet the dozen other children my parents could have had don't. You can ask them if they want to have been born, but they don't have an opinion on the matter. Which part of that do you have trouble with?
- 0-_-0 5y agoIf they will have wants once they are born, bringing them to the world is justified. Your reasoning makes no sense to me.
- 5y ago
- causasui 5y agoAbsolutely it would be. This is a variation on the "big red button" of extinction question. I'll also mention it's important not to confuse anti-natalism w/ pro-mortalism.