Discussion Antinatalism - Better Never Had Been

[fuzattojuliana]

It is not a secret that everyone here is a suicidal, but what about people yet does not exist? Why never put them into existence? Have you all saw the Benatar quadrant? Less of pleasure is not bad but presence of pain yes and we are here to talk about it. If you really really and again really cares so much like me, you do not put new people in this sick world. The sentience is the suffering, the conscience the punishment. Think, change, join to antinatalism.

 

[Mr2005]

No thanks

 

[Racon]

This didn't go well the last time...

People here seem to disagree more with the people who vocally support antinatalism rather than the idea itself.

 

[purplesmoothie]

I don't know how I feel about this. It's a very pertinent subject.

 

[Xocoyotziin]

Personally yeah, I generally think that having kids is unethical, but I'm not out to demonize or shame parents.

 

[fuzattojuliana]

No thanks

I'm sorry for you don't consider our suffering, including your too. Thank you.

 

[esse_est_percipi]

I would question some of the proposed values of the intersections.
Why is the absence of pleasure for 'x doesn't exist' considered 'not bad' rather than just 'bad'?
If when x doesn't exist the absence of pain is 'good', then considerations of symmetry suggest that the absence of pleasure should be 'bad'.
In which case existence would have a value equal to non-existence.

I actually agree that the potential payoff of existence is not enough to justify or mitigate its risks, but I'm not sure about the logic of the asymmetry of the benatar matrix.

 

[Life sucks]

Antinatalism is straightforward logically. When one brings someone to life, they end their life also which is a contradiction. Time difference is irrelevant because birth inevitably causes death. There are countless problems also but this one is the root of all problems. Birth causes (existence and not existence) which is straightforwardly illogical.

Now if people ignore this, there are infinitely many problems, contradictions and incalculable gambling that occurs. For example, being old is inevitable and therefore, birth is the cause of making someone old. Having a disease or illness is probable and birth is the reason for that disease because it ignored the main contradiction of life/death and then ignored the probability of having a disease and the impossibility of preventing all diseases.

 

[a.n.kirillov]

Benatar is equivocating in his axiological asymmetry. He is applying two different concepts of value when he says that the absent pleasure of the never existing person can not be bad because no one is deprived of anything but the absent pain of the never existing person is good. For there to be an asymmetry he has to apply the same concept of value to quadrant 3 and 4). Either something can have positive or negative value for a person that never exists or not. The argument is fallacious.

His response to the non-identity problem (never existing would be better for whom?) is that it wouldn't be better for a non-existing person, but either a) the state of the world would be a better one (he says this in a debate with harris) or b) it would be true in a counterfactual (hypothetical) case.

Response a) means that, if you agree that value or valuing presupposes a conscious subject, an unpopulated earth could not be considered good, since there is no one to consider it good. This is what I call the last-antinatalist-on-earth-pararox: the last antinatalist on earth would, by dying, make the "state of the world" (as in a value judgement) non-existent, because there would be no one perceiving or evaluating the world.

Response b) suffers from the same problem as response a), because the valuing of the counterfactual case, in which "one wouldn't have existed" still presupposes an existing, conscious, valuing animal to work. An existing consciousness can, I would argue, not even consider "not ever having existed". What he is in fact doing is comparing his life to a vague notion of not having to suffer the negative aspects of his life. But his evaluation is still within subjective experience; he can not leave this reference frame ever.

He defends the axiological asymmetry (in quadrants 3&4) by appeals to intuition. These appeals to intuition (one is the abaent marsians example) pale in comparison to how unintuitive his solution of voluntary extinction as the greatest possible good is to the vast majority of people and thus, fails as well.

 

[schopenh]

This is interesting. Thanks for sharing. I have never read any academic anti-natalism arguments before and I am reading Benatar's wikipedia page now and considering reading his book.

 

[esse_est_percipi]

How can you ask a child if they want to enter the world before they enter the world?

you can't, but you can choose to procreate or not based on considerations of potential future suffering:potential future happiness for the being created.
Choosing to create life is effectively a crap shoot, as the net result could be a terrible burden for the one brought into existence.
The antinatalists just say that it's not worth taking the risk.

 

[ecmnesia]

well, I'm not the smartest of people, and absolutely cannot engage in a deep discussion on this subject, but... We have no way to know how each individual experience in this world will turn out to be.

I personally have zero intention to bring a child into this world, since I don't think I'm exactly parent material, I don't want the responsability, but also beacause, there are LOTS of orphans kids around the wolrd, so to me it seems more reasonable, if I one day come to desire motherhood, to nurture a kid who was abandonned and is already alive. I also consider the state the world is in, I mean life has always been difficult, and of course, we can't predict if this potential individual will or will not enjoy existence, but the sole posibility of bringing someone to life for them to possibily experience the worst that this place has to offer... it's a no for me.

But then again, that's me. It applies to me because of my personal background, influenced by my personal shitty experiences in life. I do wish I was never birthed, I wish I did not exist, and to me, birth is a curse, existence is a prison, but that is my point of view. Yes, i think the world would be better out without us humans, but that doesn't give me a free pass to go around murdering people, forbiding them to have children and live the life they think is more suitable for them.

I want the freedom to call an end upon my life and at the same time I want other people to have a choice on whatever it is that they decide to do. It's not okay to impose our beliefs to people. Yes, i don't want children. No, I don't think humanity is worth of life. Yes, i think it be better if everyone decided not to procreate anymore. But that's a personal view, not an absolute truth. We have no right to assume that antinatalism is better than any other belief, as far as we know we can also be wrong. Just let people decide whatever it is that they want to do. Let people come to life, experience it and decide if they want it or not to continue.

+ Reproduction is kind of an evolutionary trait, i don't think it's realistic to expect that people won't wish for kids.

edit. I realized i made it sound like you guys wish to impose antinatalism, my bad, i dont think that's it, pls desconsider if i somehow was offensive and presumed something. i kind of got carried away :x

 

[BipolarGuy]

you can't, but you can choose to procreate or not based on considerations of potential future suffering:potential future happiness for the being created.
Choosing to create life is effectively a crap shoot, as the net result could be a terrible burden for the one brought into existence.
The antinatalists just say that it's not worth taking the risk.

Yes but under what circumstances are you talking about?

People who have been born into extreme poverty have gone on to change the world.
People born into terrorist controlled countries have gone on to fight for the right to education for young girls.
People born into ethnic minority communities have gone on to successfully fight for more equality.

While I may accept that being born into desperate poverty may not be a good thing, I'm concerned that this ideology is essentially based on
"I'm really depressed and wish I was never born, and therefore nobody should had kids ever!".

 

[Worthless_nobody]

IDK why I'm sharing this...this topic is way over my head but I just would never bring an innocent life into this world. What other people do is none of my business and that's their own decision. I'm not judging others. .......

I shared my story on another thread but I will again. My ex tied me and raped me when I ran out of birth control pills. I got pregnant and I didn't have the heart to abort. I was supposed to have a daughter...she died before birth. While I was sitting in hospital having a surgery and induced labor my asshole ex was out cheating. I held the remains of my dead baby girl in my arms. This killed me...I'll never be the same. I'm mentally fucked up for life with this imprint of a dead child in my head. Pregnancy ruined so much of my life. I'm terrified of it now.

And this is the confusing thing...I never wanted kids. I knew I would be a shit mom, didn't want to pass on bad genes and I never want to bring innocent lives into this world. Despite not wanting kids..I'm so conflicted because I'm devastated over the loss. People don't think and spew off bs saying "just have another one"....no...no. I would rather die than subject an innocent life into this world just because "I'm lonely and I need a purpose". My daughter's death killed me but as much as it pains me to say...it was for the best. Rest in peace my angel. .......I fucking hate life

 

[BipolarGuy]

IDK why I'm sharing this...this topic is way over my head but I just would never bring an innocent life into this world. What other people do is none of my business and that's their own decision. I'm not judging others. .......

I shared my story on another thread but I will again. My ex tied me and raped me when I ran out of birth control pills. I got pregnant and I didn't have the heart to abort. I was supposed to have a daughter...she died before birth. While I was sitting in hospital having a surgery and induced labor my asshole ex was out cheating. I held the remains of my dead baby girl in my arms. This killed me...I'll never be the same. I'm mentally fucked up for life with this imprint of a dead child in my head. Pregnancy ruined so much of my life. I'm terrified of it now.

And this is the confusing thing...I never wanted kids. I knew I would be a shit mom, didn't want to pass on bad genes and I never want to bring innocent lives into this world. Despite not wanting kids..I'm so conflicted because I'm devastated over the loss. People don't think and spew off bs saying "just have another one"....no...no. I would rather die than subject an innocent life into this world just because "I'm lonely and I need a purpose". My daughter's death killed me but as much as it pains me to say...it was for the best. Rest in peace my angel. .......I fucking hate life

I'm really sorry that happened to you.
That's hell.
God feel free to PM me and chat.

Your ex will be hunted down and sent to one of my 'holiday camps' when I take power....it's my final solution you could say, for various types of 'people'.

 

[esse_est_percipi]

People who have been born into extreme poverty have gone on to change the world.
People born into terrorist controlled countries have gone on to fight for the right to education for young girls.
People born into ethnic minority communities have gone on to successfully fight for more equality.

But how many more have meaningless, pitiful lives filled with illness, suffering, poverty etc?
Is the small chance that person x that mr and mrs k bring into the world becomes a pioneering scientist worth taking if person x also has a greater than average chance of having a terrible life?
Focusing on those that made it out and made successes of themselves could be a survivorship bias.

I agree with your concern though that antinatalism is a bandwagon that those with bitterness, resentment, hatred etc can easily get on and hijack.
And it's only ever going to be a marginal and irrelevant ideology anyway, given the way in which most people are wired.

Yes but under what circumstances are you talking about?

I think antinatalism would lose much of its force and raison d'etre if we lived in a much more ethically and medically advanced and compassionate world, where most illnesses were a thing of the past, wealth/resource distribution was much more equal, euthanasia was legal (though it would hardly ever be used in such a world), work was meaningful and creative for most people, among other things.
But anyway, it's all just utopian wishful thinking.

 

[Dr Iron Arc]

Oh. Another antinatalist thread again? Ok.

I still wish someone could convince me on it. What about people who happen to be wealthy enough to be able to provide their children with a really good upbringing? And how do I get over that urge to nurture a smaller version of me into becoming a much better version of me?

 

[BipolarGuy]

But how many more have meaningless, pitiful lives filled with illness, suffering, poverty etc?
Is the small chance that person x that mr and mrs k bring into the world becomes a pioneering scientist worth taking if person x also has a greater than average chance of having a terrible life?
Focusing on those that made it out and made successes of themselves could be a survivorship bias.

I agree with your concern though that antinatalism is a bandwagon that those with bitterness, resentment, hatred etc can easily get on and hijack.
And it's only ever going to be a marginal and irrelevant ideology anyway, given the way in which most people are wired.


I think antinatalism would lose much of its force and raison d'etre if we lived in a much more ethically and medically advanced and compassionate world, where most illnesses were a thing of the past, wealth/resource distribution was much more equal, euthanasia was legal (though it would hardly ever be used in such a world), work was meaningful and creative for most people, among other things.
But anyway, it's all just utopian wishful thinking.

Yes but you don't base an ideology on extreme cases or circumstances:

"Poverty exists and look how terrible it is, therefore no human should have children because that's terrible and evil".

 

[EssenceFocus]

Only because our life and society is bad at the moment, that doesn't mean it can't get better. I don't see a point in "saving" unborn people. What if the people in 1940 "saved" our grandparents?

[...]

I think antinatalism would lose much of its force and raison d'etre if we lived in a much more ethically and medically advanced and compassionate world, where most illnesses were a thing of the past, wealth/resource distribution was much more equal, euthanasia was legal (though it would hardly ever be used in such a world), work was meaningful and creative for most people, among other things.
But anyway, it's all just utopian wishful thinking.

This is exactly how I see it.
People 80 years ago would see our today life as an utopia. I see our life in 50 years as "utopian-like". These things you mentioned aren't impossible.

 

[esse_est_percipi]

What about people who happen to be wealthy enough to be able to provide their children with a really good upbringing?

This isn't necessarily a safeguard against illness, disease, existential despair etc.
Some children of wealthy and privileged people end up ctb'ing.

And how do I get over that urge to nurture a smaller version of me into becoming a much better version of me?

Maybe adopting a baby would be better?
I know it isn't a perfect substitute for passing on one's genes into a new life, but it's more ethical and altruistic.

 

[BipolarGuy]

This isn't necessarily a safeguard against illness, disease, existential despair etc.
Some children of wealthy and privileged people end up ctb'ing.

Maybe adopting a baby would be better?
I know it isn't a perfect substitute for passing on one's genes into a new life, but it's more ethical and altruistic.

This is what I'm saying.

You can essentially reason that its moral to breed the human race into extinction because some people get unwell.

 

[Sinkinshyp]

IDK why I'm sharing this...this topic is way over my head but I just would never bring an innocent life into this world. What other people do is none of my business and that's their own decision. I'm not judging others. .......

I shared my story on another thread but I will again. My ex tied me and raped me when I ran out of birth control pills. I got pregnant and I didn't have the heart to abort. I was supposed to have a daughter...she died before birth. While I was sitting in hospital having a surgery and induced labor my asshole ex was out cheating. I held the remains of my dead baby girl in my arms. This killed me...I'll never be the same. I'm mentally fucked up for life with this imprint of a dead child in my head. Pregnancy ruined so much of my life. I'm terrified of it now.

And this is the confusing thing...I never wanted kids. I knew I would be a shit mom, didn't want to pass on bad genes and I never want to bring innocent lives into this world. Despite not wanting kids..I'm so conflicted because I'm devastated over the loss. People don't think and spew off bs saying "just have another one"....no...no. I would rather die than subject an innocent life into this world just because "I'm lonely and I need a purpose". My daughter's death killed me but as much as it pains me to say...it was for the best. Rest in peace my angel. .......I fucking hate life

I'm so very sorry that happened to you. If you ever need to talk my pm box is always available. I had 2 miscarriages. My 25 yr old son died in a car accident almost 3 yrs ago. A moms body is made to protect her child. If she doesn't eat right- all the nutrients will go to her baby and she will not get any. In essence she would be killing herself to preserve her unborn child. When we get pregnant theres some switch that clicks and as a mom we do anything to nurture and protect our chlid. The bond begins in the womb. Even though how that child got there must have been horrific, your mom mode genes kicked in. I'm so sorry you had to go through all that.

 

[ecmnesia]

Only because our life and society is bad at the moment, that doesn't mean it can't get better. I don't see a point in "saving" unborn people. What if the people in 1940 "saved" our grandparents?


This is exactly how I see it.
People 80 years ago would see our today life as an utopia. I see our life in 50 years as "utopian-like". These things you mentioned aren't impossible.

I wish they did, lol.

but seriously, how can this be seen as an utopia? sure, lots of things improved but it's not like the ultimate goal was reached. as far as I'm concerned we are way far from it.

not saying you are wrong, it just doesn't seem like a good argument.

 

[EssenceFocus]

I wish they did, lol.

but seriously, how can this be seen as an utopia? sure, lots of things improved but it's not like the ultimate goal was reached. as far as I'm concerned we are way far from it.

not saying you are wrong, it just doesn't seem like a good argument.

From the perspective of people, having to go into war it seems way better(at least in western countries and some others). Most of us have enough to eat. We "could" study anything and work anything we want. After the war, there was the big fear of nuclear devastation. We have the Internet, where nearly everyone can communicate with everyone despite the distance and so on.

Of course I don't see our time as an utopia, only the people from the past would see it as magical. And I see it as magical, what lays beyond us. Of course this doesn't change our situation at the moment, that's right.

 

[Sinkinshyp]

I have a son who will be 20 in a couple of months. I am concerned what the world will be like when he is older. It has changed so much in my time here some for the better some for the worse... There is no way to know if an unborn person will be happy or not. NO matter where you live- your finances-upbringing- and all other arguments. Having money doesn't bring you happiness. So this fight of well being born into poverty.... my older son would be 28 now. He passed in a car accident at 25. He found peace and happiness in taking pictures of clouds and the ocean he shared them on facebook or texted to his friends. Sure he would have loved to be rich to have his dream car but he was happy with the simple things in life money could not provide. Most parents have children with hopes to give them a good life full of love. As a parent I sacrificed a lot for my kids and I would do it all over again and I do not regret it. I went without so they could have. It was my obligation as a parent.

@Dr Iron Arc said " What about people who happen to be wealthy enough to be able to provide their children with a really good upbringing?"
Look up Kristoff St John son Julian St Johns suicide. Kristoff St John was a known actor very wealthy. His son committed suicide.
Money doesnt = "really good uprbinging" love, devotion, sacrifice, = " really good upbringing"

 

[Dr Iron Arc]

Maybe adopting a baby would be better?
I know it isn't a perfect substitute for passing on one's genes into a new life, but it's more ethical and altruistic.

I feel like in that case it could also be more unethical to adopt because my love for them would inevitably be less likely to be unconditional than if they were my own...

 

[Amumu]

Sorry, but this post seems to be narrow-minded.
There are happy people in this world.
The fact that we're all more or less suicidal here doesn't mean it's the case for all people.
I don't really like malthusianism.

 

[esse_est_percipi]

Yes but you don't base an ideology on extreme cases or circumstances:

"Poverty exists and look how terrible it is, therefore no human should have children because that's terrible and evil".

I'm not so sure that suffering in general is only found on the extreme limits of human experience though, although I admit that the majority of humans will never get to the point where they feel their only option out of life's problems is to ctb. Humans are extremely and sometimes irrationally resiliant.
I'm also not sure that antinatalists say that all existence is terrible and no life is worth living, it's just about the risk analysis when it comes to choosing to procreate or not.

Coming at antinatalism from another angle: optimism bias says that people believe that they themselves or their offspring are less likely than the average person to experience negative events.
For example, mr g is aware of a few distant relatives who have schizophrenia, but doesn't think that it has any bearing on the chance of it affecting his own child.
He thinks his child will in all likelihood be fine and live a decent life.
However, mr g's child ends up developing schizophrenia, which diminishes his quality of life and he ends up wishing he had never been born and ctb'ing because of this and other negative factors like lack of friendship, bullying he endured as a child, unfulfilling work.
Mr g was mistaken in his optimism, and had he taken the time to consider the genetic component of schizophrenia, and the the actual objective chances of passing on the genes involved, along with the gamut of other negative experiences human are subjected to all the time, he may have decided that the risk was too much and not given birth to that child.

Instead of a philosophy which pontificates on life, suffering and procreation in general, I think that antinatalism can be taken in a more restricted way, as a useful device or grid to be used on a case by case basis by individuals, giving it some value.

I feel like in that case it could also be more unethical to adopt because my love for them would inevitably be less likely to be unconditional than if they were my own...

But the unadpoted baby already exists and is in need of someone to care for them right now, whereas your own genetic baby doesn't even exist yet.
Lots of adopted children are able to find loving parents, even if that love isn't exactly equivalent to the love that might otherwise have been given to genetic offspring.

 

[BipolarGuy]

I'm not so sure that suffering in general is only found on the extreme limits of human experience though, although I admit that the majority of humans will never get to the point where they feel their only option out of life's problems is to ctb. Humans are extremely and sometimes irrationally resiliant.
I'm also not sure that antinatalists say that all existence is terrible and no life is worth living, it's just about the risk analysis when it comes to choosing to procreate or not.

Coming at antinatalism from another angle: optimism bias says that people believe that they themselves or their offspring are less likely than the average person to experience negative events.
For example, mr g is aware of a few distant relatives who have schizophrenia, but doesn't think that it has any bearing on the chance of it affecting his own child.
He thinks his child will in all likelihood be fine and live a decent life.
However, mr g's child ends up developing schizophrenia, which diminishes his quality of life and he ends up wishing he had never been born and ctb'ing because of this and other negative factors like lack of friendship, bullying he endured as a child, unfulfilling work.
Mr g was mistaken in his optimism, and had he taken the time to consider the genetic component of schizophrenia, and the the actual objective chances of passing on the genes involved, along with the gamut of other negative experiences human are subjected to all the time, he may have decided that the risk was too much and not given birth to that child.

Instead of a philosophy which pontificates on life, suffering and procreation in general, I think that antinatalism can be taken in a more restricted way, as a useful device or grid to be used on a case by case basis by individuals, giving it some value.

Well if you're just saying that people should consider whether it's the best time in their lives to have children yet, or that it's probably best not if they're in absolute poverty, then I'd agree.

But I'm not sure than an ideology has been built upon such reasonable foundations.

 

[Dr Iron Arc]

Lots of adopted children are able to find loving parents, even if that love isn't exactly equivalent to the love that might otherwise have been given to genetic offspring.

Oh most definitely, I just don't think they'd be able to get that from me. You do have a point though.