5 ms·

Mars will be there in 20 years. Your kids' childhood won't.

TeMPOraL 11y ago
OTOH the future my kid would live in would be better. But honestly though, if I knew I'm doing work I consider that important, I wouldn't decide to have a kid in the first place.
- clavalle 11y ago
  My uncle did that. Spent his life on eliminating malaria. Good work. Now he's dead and there are no kids in his line that might carry his intellectual legacy or create their own. Human life is short term. Good genes and culture are long term. If everyone capable burned through their 50 or so years attempting to create a better world in such a hurry there'd be few with the capacity to perpetuate that vision or create their own. It is not an either/or proposition. It is worth in in the long term to find balance, not for yourself, but for the future of humanity.
  - TeMPOraL 11y ago
    I'm sorry that your uncle passed away. I wish I could thank him while he was alive for the work he did. You have an interesting point about passing on legacy, but then again there are so many people born every day, that there will be more than enough people to perpetuate the vision if they can learn about it. Having a child furthers memory only temporary. I myself don't know much about my grand-grandparents and have no clue about who their parents were. I doubt many people do. In the end, we all get forgotten, but our work may improve the lives of next generations. > It is not an either/or proposition. It is worth in in the long term to find balance, not for yourself, but for the future of humanity. I strongly agree, and that's how I try to look at it. I don't want to burn out, but I personally don't consider starting a family to be an important goal for me. I respect that it is for many others, and I believe they should be supported. Some people sacrifice themselves for others to have better lives. Some people are the others. And many are in the middle. I don't think any of them are making a bad choice.
    - clavalle 11y ago
      You might not remember your great-grandparents but your DNA does. Your family culture does. Much of what makes you, you is built from their legacy. If you are out there learning and applying skills that are making the world better, you can bet that a significant measure of that disposition comes from decisions made by them 100 years ago. And a hundred years from now our decisions will influence the make up of people trying to advance humanity (or not) in their time as well. We are lucky as humans that we have effective ways to pass on information to each other and to the future generations and to have plenty of people for that information to find purchase. But I think it is a deep mistake to discount the ancient (and more reliable IMHO) vectors of genetics and family tradition. I respect people's very personal choices but if I could wave a wand and change one pervasive thing about our world it would be to have people take a much longer view and incorporate that in their decision making. Much longer than the span of their own lives. That shift would lead to very different choices than are made on average today.
      - MetaCosm 11y ago
        > You might not remember your great-grandparents but your DNA does. Your family culture does. Much of what makes you, you is built from their legacy. This sounds like a person arguing on behalf a cast system. Without the right family culture and DNA you can't possible be successful/worthwhile, lets just put those people in a cast to save time, easy labeling for all! Maybe if you breed with a better cast and become part of their family your future would be brighter, so we will arrange a marriage to make this so. This isn't some far off idea - this is the norm in some places, and it is disgusting. Do you support eugenics? Do you think less of intelligent people who choose to adopt rather than breed? Do you think overpopulation is a non-issue? Do you believe cast systems are useful? Human knowledge and functional advancement is vastly more important than genetics or children. Jonas Salk had three children, but anyone who claimed "his children are his greatest accomplishment" would be laughed at. His impact on mankind was direct. Direct impact is always better, because no matter how many generations your DNA is passed on, it is all meaningless until they at some point take action and do something. Mindless breeding is something rabbits can do. There is this desperately sad tendency to want to "pass the buck" to children... sure, MY life was a huge waste, but maybe my children will be something special, maybe it was all worth it because of them.... or my grandchildren. People who do something in the here and now are to be admired because they are a rarity.

OTOH the future my kid would live in would be better. But honestly though, if I knew I'm doing work I consider that important, I wouldn't decide to have a kid in the first place.

clavalle 11y ago
My uncle did that. Spent his life on eliminating malaria. Good work. Now he's dead and there are no kids in his line that might carry his intellectual legacy or create their own. Human life is short term. Good genes and culture are long term. If everyone capable burned through their 50 or so years attempting to create a better world in such a hurry there'd be few with the capacity to perpetuate that vision or create their own. It is not an either/or proposition. It is worth in in the long term to find balance, not for yourself, but for the future of humanity.
- TeMPOraL 11y ago
  I'm sorry that your uncle passed away. I wish I could thank him while he was alive for the work he did. You have an interesting point about passing on legacy, but then again there are so many people born every day, that there will be more than enough people to perpetuate the vision if they can learn about it. Having a child furthers memory only temporary. I myself don't know much about my grand-grandparents and have no clue about who their parents were. I doubt many people do. In the end, we all get forgotten, but our work may improve the lives of next generations. > It is not an either/or proposition. It is worth in in the long term to find balance, not for yourself, but for the future of humanity. I strongly agree, and that's how I try to look at it. I don't want to burn out, but I personally don't consider starting a family to be an important goal for me. I respect that it is for many others, and I believe they should be supported. Some people sacrifice themselves for others to have better lives. Some people are the others. And many are in the middle. I don't think any of them are making a bad choice.
  - clavalle 11y ago
    You might not remember your great-grandparents but your DNA does. Your family culture does. Much of what makes you, you is built from their legacy. If you are out there learning and applying skills that are making the world better, you can bet that a significant measure of that disposition comes from decisions made by them 100 years ago. And a hundred years from now our decisions will influence the make up of people trying to advance humanity (or not) in their time as well. We are lucky as humans that we have effective ways to pass on information to each other and to the future generations and to have plenty of people for that information to find purchase. But I think it is a deep mistake to discount the ancient (and more reliable IMHO) vectors of genetics and family tradition. I respect people's very personal choices but if I could wave a wand and change one pervasive thing about our world it would be to have people take a much longer view and incorporate that in their decision making. Much longer than the span of their own lives. That shift would lead to very different choices than are made on average today.
    - MetaCosm 11y ago
      > You might not remember your great-grandparents but your DNA does. Your family culture does. Much of what makes you, you is built from their legacy. This sounds like a person arguing on behalf a cast system. Without the right family culture and DNA you can't possible be successful/worthwhile, lets just put those people in a cast to save time, easy labeling for all! Maybe if you breed with a better cast and become part of their family your future would be brighter, so we will arrange a marriage to make this so. This isn't some far off idea - this is the norm in some places, and it is disgusting. Do you support eugenics? Do you think less of intelligent people who choose to adopt rather than breed? Do you think overpopulation is a non-issue? Do you believe cast systems are useful? Human knowledge and functional advancement is vastly more important than genetics or children. Jonas Salk had three children, but anyone who claimed "his children are his greatest accomplishment" would be laughed at. His impact on mankind was direct. Direct impact is always better, because no matter how many generations your DNA is passed on, it is all meaningless until they at some point take action and do something. Mindless breeding is something rabbits can do. There is this desperately sad tendency to want to "pass the buck" to children... sure, MY life was a huge waste, but maybe my children will be something special, maybe it was all worth it because of them.... or my grandchildren. People who do something in the here and now are to be admired because they are a rarity.