davidtorez
Wizard
- Mar 8, 2024
- 687
I asked chat gpt this question. Then I asked it to formulate it into a better argument for me. What do you guys think of it? The question is in the screenshot attached
Is it morally justifiable to bring a person into existence, knowing they will suffer, struggle, and die — even if they might find happiness along the way?
To explore this question, consider the following analogy: imagine forcing someone to swim through shark-infested waters to reach an island filled with treasure. Some may succeed, some may die, and none were given the choice to opt out. Would such an act be morally acceptable?
This analogy captures the ethical problem of procreation — the decision to create sentient life without consent, knowing it will be exposed to unavoidable suffering. The argument, grounded in consent, risk, and harm, leads to a powerful conclusion: procreation is morally unjustifiable.
The Analogy
Suppose you push someone into shark-infested waters and tell them:
"If you make it to the island, there's gold worth millions waiting for you. It'll be worth it.
You know:
The waters are dangerous.
Some people will drown, be maimed, or traumatized.
Some will make it and even thank you — but they didn't choose to swim.
This person didn't ask to be there. You made the decision for them, justifying it with the possibility of reward.
The Moral Problem
This act violates several basic ethical principles:
1. Lack of Consent
Consent is a moral cornerstone. Forcing someone into danger without it is unethical.
The person didn't choose the risk, and by the time they're aware of it, it's too late to opt out.
2. Imposition of Risk and Harm
The danger is real. Not everyone makes it. Some suffer horribly.
Even if rewards are possible, risking someone else's life and well-being for a potential benefit is morally wrong, especially when the risk is certain and they had no say in it.
3. Gratitude Doesn't Justify the Act
Survivors who make it to the island and enjoy the gold may feel thankful.
But that doesn't mean it was right to push them in.
Gratitude after survival doesn't retroactively justify non-consensual danger.
The Parallel to Procreation
Now replace the island with life, the sharks with suffering and death, and the gold with happiness or fulfillment.
To be born is to be thrust into existence — a condition that guarantees exposure to pain, loss, anxiety, aging, and death.
Some people might find love, joy, and meaning — others will suffer deeply.
But none of us chose to enter this condition. We were forced into the swim.
The Core Moral Argument
Forcing someone into a high-risk situation without their consent is morally wrong — even if it might lead to pleasure.
Being born exposes a person to significant suffering and risk, without their consent.
Therefore, bringing someone into existence is morally wrong.
Conclusion
If it is morally wrong to force someone to risk their life for treasure without consent, it must also be wrong to bring someone into existence — exposing them to the inescapable harms of conscious life — without their consent.
The swim through life may contain gold, but the waters are filled with sharks.
If you wouldn't push someone in, you shouldn't push someone into existence either.
Is it morally justifiable to bring a person into existence, knowing they will suffer, struggle, and die — even if they might find happiness along the way?
To explore this question, consider the following analogy: imagine forcing someone to swim through shark-infested waters to reach an island filled with treasure. Some may succeed, some may die, and none were given the choice to opt out. Would such an act be morally acceptable?
This analogy captures the ethical problem of procreation — the decision to create sentient life without consent, knowing it will be exposed to unavoidable suffering. The argument, grounded in consent, risk, and harm, leads to a powerful conclusion: procreation is morally unjustifiable.
The Analogy
Suppose you push someone into shark-infested waters and tell them:
"If you make it to the island, there's gold worth millions waiting for you. It'll be worth it.
You know:
The waters are dangerous.
Some people will drown, be maimed, or traumatized.
Some will make it and even thank you — but they didn't choose to swim.
This person didn't ask to be there. You made the decision for them, justifying it with the possibility of reward.
The Moral Problem
This act violates several basic ethical principles:
1. Lack of Consent
Consent is a moral cornerstone. Forcing someone into danger without it is unethical.
The person didn't choose the risk, and by the time they're aware of it, it's too late to opt out.
2. Imposition of Risk and Harm
The danger is real. Not everyone makes it. Some suffer horribly.
Even if rewards are possible, risking someone else's life and well-being for a potential benefit is morally wrong, especially when the risk is certain and they had no say in it.
3. Gratitude Doesn't Justify the Act
Survivors who make it to the island and enjoy the gold may feel thankful.
But that doesn't mean it was right to push them in.
Gratitude after survival doesn't retroactively justify non-consensual danger.
The Parallel to Procreation
Now replace the island with life, the sharks with suffering and death, and the gold with happiness or fulfillment.
To be born is to be thrust into existence — a condition that guarantees exposure to pain, loss, anxiety, aging, and death.
Some people might find love, joy, and meaning — others will suffer deeply.
But none of us chose to enter this condition. We were forced into the swim.
The Core Moral Argument
Forcing someone into a high-risk situation without their consent is morally wrong — even if it might lead to pleasure.
Being born exposes a person to significant suffering and risk, without their consent.
Therefore, bringing someone into existence is morally wrong.
Conclusion
If it is morally wrong to force someone to risk their life for treasure without consent, it must also be wrong to bring someone into existence — exposing them to the inescapable harms of conscious life — without their consent.
The swim through life may contain gold, but the waters are filled with sharks.
If you wouldn't push someone in, you shouldn't push someone into existence either.
