5 ms·
If it caused no other harm yes. Because you would still get to live a long life, just not inflict it on someone else.
by kongin 5y ago
If 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.
- kongin 5y agoThen why aren't you bringing in as many children into the world as you can? The average couple can have 12 children in their reproductive lives. Are you on track to reach that goal?
- 0-_-0 5y agoIt was you who said that the important distinction is desire to live, I showed where that reasoning leads, and you agreed that it's nonsense. I have nothing more to say.
- kongin 5y agoNo, I said the major difference is existence. Destroying something that exists is different to not making it in the first place.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- ryandvm 5y ago> The better question is why aren't you having children as often as possible if you think life is worth while. That's a pretty weak "gotcha" as well. The reason I have had 3 children instead of 12 is because it balances my interest and desire to be a parent with the work/cost of doing so. I doubt anyone's decision to reproduce is centered around bestowing the maximal amount of meaning to the universe.
- kongin 5y agoFair enough, but 'I want children to treat as pets' is not something the majority of parents are willing to admit, even though in practice it is the number one reason people have children.