3 ms·
>Should we remove the option for women to receive epidurals This is an example of how the concept of the good has been bastardized, the idea that if a little b
by hackinthebochs 3y ago
>Should we remove the option for women to receive epidurals
This is an example of how the concept of the good has been bastardized, the idea that if a little bit of X is good, a lot of X necessarily is better. No, that it is good to get rid of the excruciating pain associated with childbirth does not imply getting rid of all the discomfort associated with childbirth is good. Our concept of good has been totally untethered from anything concrete; it has become nothing more than an abstract quantity to be optimized to maximum effect. But we don't stop to ask ourselves if getting rid of core human experiences is what we should be aiming for.
>evolution does not care about the wellbeing of the individual
Evolution doesn't care about the well being of the individual, but the individual has been optimized to find well being in the kinds of environments our ancestors evolved in. These environments included pains, hardship, pathogens, risk, uncertainty, etc. Using technology to decouple our lived experience from anything resembling the natural environments we evolved in can and will have detrimental side-effects. Technology is great in that it can potentially let everyone have the chance at a meaningful and fulfilled life. But we've gone so far beyond that, and we're seeing the results in the various diseases of modern life. We need to rethink our approach.
- lotsofpulp 3y ago> getting rid of all the discomfort associated with childbirth is good. If you are framing the process of childbirth as discomfort, we will simply have to agree to disagree. Discomfort is stubbing your toe, or sleeping in an uncomfortable position and getting a frozen neck. See the lists from this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37316056 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37316056
- hackinthebochs 3y agoNarrowly focusing on the potential complications of childbirth is missing the bigger picture. Taking pregnancy out of the human experience significantly changes the human experience. Such a change is not without consequences and shouldn't be done lightly, and certainly not due to "burdens and risks".
- lotsofpulp 3y agoEverything humans do is due to “burdens and risks”, with the explicit goal of changing the human experience. Without progress, the human experience involves a ton of maternal and infant mortality. And obviously everything has consequences, good and bad. These are not reasons to freeze the process of birthing a child to a specific point in time.
- hackinthebochs 3y agoThere's a difference between incidental experiences and features that are definitive of what it means to be human. The process of pregnancy is definitive, infant mortality is not. Just because we have eliminated one class of experiences to good effect does not commit us to an unquestioning march of "progress".
- remarkEon 3y agoThe issue is that a lot of people, primarily technologists in my estimation, just don't like the human experience all that much. They'd like to do away with it as much as possible and replace it with a sanitized and mechanical experience instead.
- lotsofpulp 3y agoThese are arbitrary distinctions. Not too long ago, malnutrition, hunger, and losing a few young family members to infections was “definitive” too.