4 ms·

In your system of morality some guy who's condom broke or a rapist are more moral than someone who is infertile, and you are so sure of it you propose taxation

by vasco 3y ago

In your system of morality some guy who's condom broke or a rapist are more moral than someone who is infertile, and you are so sure of it you propose taxation to pile on top. Maybe you should reconsider if it makes perfect sense.

HL33tibCe7 3y ago
You could reasonably consider people who adopt as “having children”. Likewise it would be easy to exclude rapist fathers from any scheme of this sort.
TeMPOraL 3y ago
> In your system of morality GP didn't write a moral judgement, but a practical one. People who don't have/care for kids don't have long-term skin in the game, therefore their influence on the shape of future society should be downweighed. There is a logic to that. > some guy who's condom broke Yes, this is how a lot of families are made. Unplanned != unwanted != unloved. > or a rapist are more moral than someone who is infertile Again, not about morality. GP's logic isn't about whether one's good or bad, but whether one has skin in the game of continued improvement of society and civilization. But I guess a better way of scoping it is whether or not the person is a parent (EDIT: or in legal terms, caregiver?). Infertile people can become parents too (and that could be an indication of extra special caring about the future generation). And then people can be biological parents, but not actual parents, e.g. if they give their child away.
- auggierose 3y ago
  But the definition on "skin in the game" varies from person to person. Plenty of people with kids don't consider them as skin in the game. Plenty of people without kids have lots of skin in the game.
- malermeister 3y ago
  I can't care about the future of my nephew? Or screw that, I can't just want to leave the world a better place without any ulterior motives?
  - TeMPOraL 3y ago
    Sure you can. The parent was describing a heuristic they apply. If I don't know you, but need to quickly judge whether or not you're likely to care about future over immediate-term, you being a parent is... not the worst proxy I could use. FWIW, I don't exactly agree with the poster on this. I feel that parents are biased towards near-term almost by definition: caring and nurturing children is an immediate job. Whether or not a typical non-parent is likely to be a "fuck you, got mine" kind of person, I find that parents tend to become more of a "fuck you, my kids got theirs" kind of people. Not out of ill intent - just more of "concrete needs of my kids today trump abstract speculative needs of their generation a few decades from now".
    - kelnos 3y ago
      I think it's a bit more than that. The person upthread goes a bit farther than just whether or not someone cares about the future or not. It sounds like they've basically judged all childless people as hedonists who would gladly burn down the world as long as we get in one last round of golf. Maybe that person doesn't really believe that, but if so, should probably be clearer about their position and not resort to veiled personal attacks.
    - remarkEon 3y ago
      Been stewing on this comment. You are right, I think, for roughly half of the parents in my peer group. They do indeed act with a "fuck you, my kids got theirs" attitude. But I think the heuristic still works, because the near term things that those parents care about tend to be highly correlated with what makes sense in the long term. Another comment, in this dumpster fire of a thread that I started, noted that becoming a parent makes you crazy. Alas, I think becoming a parent makes you normal. After all, everyone has a parent.

by vasco 3y ago

HL33tibCe7 3y ago

You could reasonably consider people who adopt as “having children”. Likewise it would be easy to exclude rapist fathers from any scheme of this sort.

TeMPOraL 3y ago

> In your system of morality GP didn't write a moral judgement, but a practical one. People who don't have/care for kids don't have long-term skin in the game, therefore their influence on the shape of future society should be downweighed. There is a logic to that. > some guy who's condom broke Yes, this is how a lot of families are made. Unplanned != unwanted != unloved. > or a rapist are more moral than someone who is infertile Again, not about morality. GP's logic isn't about whether one's good or bad, but whether one has skin in the game of continued improvement of society and civilization. But I guess a better way of scoping it is whether or not the person is a parent (EDIT: or in legal terms, caregiver?). Infertile people can become parents too (and that could be an indication of extra special caring about the future generation). And then people can be biological parents, but not actual parents, e.g. if they give their child away.

auggierose 3y ago
But the definition on "skin in the game" varies from person to person. Plenty of people with kids don't consider them as skin in the game. Plenty of people without kids have lots of skin in the game.
malermeister 3y ago
I can't care about the future of my nephew? Or screw that, I can't just want to leave the world a better place without any ulterior motives?
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  Sure you can. The parent was describing a heuristic they apply. If I don't know you, but need to quickly judge whether or not you're likely to care about future over immediate-term, you being a parent is... not the worst proxy I could use. FWIW, I don't exactly agree with the poster on this. I feel that parents are biased towards near-term almost by definition: caring and nurturing children is an immediate job. Whether or not a typical non-parent is likely to be a "fuck you, got mine" kind of person, I find that parents tend to become more of a "fuck you, my kids got theirs" kind of people. Not out of ill intent - just more of "concrete needs of my kids today trump abstract speculative needs of their generation a few decades from now".
  - kelnos 3y ago
    I think it's a bit more than that. The person upthread goes a bit farther than just whether or not someone cares about the future or not. It sounds like they've basically judged all childless people as hedonists who would gladly burn down the world as long as we get in one last round of golf. Maybe that person doesn't really believe that, but if so, should probably be clearer about their position and not resort to veiled personal attacks.
  - remarkEon 3y ago
    Been stewing on this comment. You are right, I think, for roughly half of the parents in my peer group. They do indeed act with a "fuck you, my kids got theirs" attitude. But I think the heuristic still works, because the near term things that those parents care about tend to be highly correlated with what makes sense in the long term. Another comment, in this dumpster fire of a thread that I started, noted that becoming a parent makes you crazy. Alas, I think becoming a parent makes you normal. After all, everyone has a parent.