The gift that kills you

[Darkover]

First of all, a gift for whom? After all, you can't give something to someone who doesn't exist. It's not that there was someone who really wanted to exist and their parents decided to grant them existence; there was no one before people decided that there would be someone, someone who didn't want, ask, or would have been disappointed if they hadn't received, the "gift" of existence. So if anything it is a gift to the parents, or to the parents of the parents who pushed for grandchildren, or to the consumer society that got another consumer, or to the state because there is another tax payer, or to the army because there is another soldier, etc. But it is certainly not a gift for those who did not exist before receiving it. Regardless of someone's quality of life, before someone existed they did not want it and therefore the created is the last to receive a gift.

Since it is not necessary, not desirable, and not in anyone's interest to exist, and since the creation of a person does not move someone to a better state, since before someone existed s/he was not in any state, there is no logic in treating the creation of a person as some kind of benefit. Reproduction is not a gift but an unnecessary creation of a vulnerable person who will inevitably experience unnecessary harms.

Beyond that, gifts are something you get for free, not something you have to work for, and for almost a lifetime.
Something is not a gift if I cannot choose not to use it. And in the case of life, keeping it in a drawer or passing it on to someone else is not an option. Everyone has to use their life in one way or another. There is no exchange note. Even ending one's life, even at a very young age, requires the use of this "gift". Which of course makes it at least not a gift. So even if you insist that life is a good thing, it is certainly not a gift and it is not granted to anyone. People are created, if their lives are relatively good then the compulsion done to them is less bad than cases of bad lives, but that does not retroactively make this compulsion a gift or something that is granted to someone.

A gift you receive for free, and you can choose to enjoy it or ignore it, but it is unlikely that gifts will harm the person who receives them. Life, on the other hand, is not something you get for free, you have to work hard for it non-stop, you can't ignore life, and it can definitely hurt those who receive it. To enjoy a gift you usually just have to use it. To enjoy life you have to work hard. And unlike gifts, if you ignore life very quickly you suffer from hunger, thirst, pain, heat, cold, boredom, frustration, loneliness, etc. It is not possible to store life somewhere and ignore it. Therefore, even if you insist that life is good, it is surely not a gift.
A gift is not something that is forced. Gifts can be returned or passed up. And gifts usually don't end in death.

 

[DoubleUp8]

First of all, a gift for whom? After all, you can't give something to someone who doesn't exist. It's not that there was someone who really wanted to exist and their parents decided to grant them existence; there was no one before people decided that there would be someone, someone who didn't want, ask, or would have been disappointed if they hadn't received, the "gift" of existence. So if anything it is a gift to the parents, or to the parents of the parents who pushed for grandchildren, or to the consumer society that got another consumer, or to the state because there is another tax payer, or to the army because there is another soldier, etc. But it is certainly not a gift for those who did not exist before receiving it. Regardless of someone's quality of life, before someone existed they did not want it and therefore the created is the last to receive a gift.

Since it is not necessary, not desirable, and not in anyone's interest to exist, and since the creation of a person does not move someone to a better state, since before someone existed s/he was not in any state, there is no logic in treating the creation of a person as some kind of benefit. Reproduction is not a gift but an unnecessary creation of a vulnerable person who will inevitably experience unnecessary harms.

Beyond that, gifts are something you get for free, not something you have to work for, and for almost a lifetime.
Something is not a gift if I cannot choose not to use it. And in the case of life, keeping it in a drawer or passing it on to someone else is not an option. Everyone has to use their life in one way or another. There is no exchange note. Even ending one's life, even at a very young age, requires the use of this "gift". Which of course makes it at least not a gift. So even if you insist that life is a good thing, it is certainly not a gift and it is not granted to anyone. People are created, if their lives are relatively good then the compulsion done to them is less bad than cases of bad lives, but that does not retroactively make this compulsion a gift or something that is granted to someone.

A gift you receive for free, and you can choose to enjoy it or ignore it, but it is unlikely that gifts will harm the person who receives them. Life, on the other hand, is not something you get for free, you have to work hard for it non-stop, you can't ignore life, and it can definitely hurt those who receive it. To enjoy a gift you usually just have to use it. To enjoy life you have to work hard. And unlike gifts, if you ignore life very quickly you suffer from hunger, thirst, pain, heat, cold, boredom, frustration, loneliness, etc. It is not possible to store life somewhere and ignore it. Therefore, even if you insist that life is good, it is surely not a gift.
A gift is not something that is forced. Gifts can be returned or passed up. And gifts usually don't end in death.

That's excellent analysis.

 

[the_path_of_sorrows]

I completely agree with you. I never asked to be born, especially to the parents with hereditary mental illness. Why would you even procreate, to not ctb yourself? This is not a gift, giving birth to the so called miracle is nothing to be proud of, nor is having a suicidal child. Being alive is a chore, nothing else. I don't consider myself a gift and I've been telling this to my parents for almost 10 years.

 

[Forever Sleep]

I guess for people who do value life, and there are some- it must seem like a miracle to them that they found themselves here and able to experience this. I suppose they are grateful for their lives so- they probably do see it as a gift. The kind of- think what I would have missed out on if my parents hadn't had me. Although- like you say- it's not like we probably even know what we're missing out on- or what we avoided even when we are non existent.

I suppose that's the other argument though- are the non existent actually 'better off'? They're literally not anything most probably.

Still yeah- I was thinking along these lines just now. Like- imagine you could start a game for someone. You know certain things about this game. It could be amazing. They could have a fantastic time. Still- you know there are some unpleasant and painful guarantees. The game will end with their death. Plus, they'll very likely have to witness loved ones dying beforehand. Plus, they are in a body that will degrade over time and is susceptible to a whole bunch of unpleasant things. Like- why would you start that for someone else? When they wouldn't even know it if you didn't? Why are these horrible things in life seen as 'normal' and acceptable to go through? Maybe because they went through some of them and to them, it still feels like a game worth playing. It baffles me though.

 

[Infinite Solipsist]

Too much of a good thing is said to be a bad thing. So for this "gift" to kill the recipient, then quantity is needed over quality? I still struggle with the fact that there are those whose lives are 1,000,000,000x worse than mine (who aren't suicidal) yet I'm supposed to be happy with mine.

 

[UsurpedByDepression]

First of all, a gift for whom? After all, you can't give something to someone who doesn't exist. It's not that there was someone who really wanted to exist and their parents decided to grant them existence; there was no one before people decided that there would be someone, someone who didn't want, ask, or would have been disappointed if they hadn't received, the "gift" of existence. So if anything it is a gift to the parents, or to the parents of the parents who pushed for grandchildren, or to the consumer society that got another consumer, or to the state because there is another tax payer, or to the army because there is another soldier, etc. But it is certainly not a gift for those who did not exist before receiving it. Regardless of someone's quality of life, before someone existed they did not want it and therefore the created is the last to receive a gift.

Since it is not necessary, not desirable, and not in anyone's interest to exist, and since the creation of a person does not move someone to a better state, since before someone existed s/he was not in any state, there is no logic in treating the creation of a person as some kind of benefit. Reproduction is not a gift but an unnecessary creation of a vulnerable person who will inevitably experience unnecessary harms.

Beyond that, gifts are something you get for free, not something you have to work for, and for almost a lifetime.
Something is not a gift if I cannot choose not to use it. And in the case of life, keeping it in a drawer or passing it on to someone else is not an option. Everyone has to use their life in one way or another. There is no exchange note. Even ending one's life, even at a very young age, requires the use of this "gift". Which of course makes it at least not a gift. So even if you insist that life is a good thing, it is certainly not a gift and it is not granted to anyone. People are created, if their lives are relatively good then the compulsion done to them is less bad than cases of bad lives, but that does not retroactively make this compulsion a gift or something that is granted to someone.

A gift you receive for free, and you can choose to enjoy it or ignore it, but it is unlikely that gifts will harm the person who receives them. Life, on the other hand, is not something you get for free, you have to work hard for it non-stop, you can't ignore life, and it can definitely hurt those who receive it. To enjoy a gift you usually just have to use it. To enjoy life you have to work hard. And unlike gifts, if you ignore life very quickly you suffer from hunger, thirst, pain, heat, cold, boredom, frustration, loneliness, etc. It is not possible to store life somewhere and ignore it. Therefore, even if you insist that life is good, it is surely not a gift.
A gift is not something that is forced. Gifts can be returned or passed up. And gifts usually don't end in death.

you managed to summarize a bit what I think, if in life it is a sin to trample on the freedom of others to put your own first, then I think that the "original sin" does not consist in being born before you can be baptized, therefore born before being considered children of God, but rather, the real "original sin" is that, fundamentally, strangers have put their own freedom before yours, imposing themselves on your will, catapulting you into an insidious world, in which a myriad, a slew of asperities proliferate; therefore the "original sin" should not be attributed to the unborn child but to its procreators, without your consent;

but then, dear Darkover, it is not even entirely as you say, because it is even worse! tell me, who in their right mind would give a random stranger the choice of whether or not to be taken into the most beautiful, basking and comfortable place in the world, in short, the happiest place ever, only to then be deported to a harsh, bristly, uninhabitable, septic and cold place, where everything falls under the dictates of chaos and entropy (which then seems so to us because we are limited primates), where if you are too weak to bear the imminent obstacles you suffer and perish mercilessly and you will also be judged and blamed by the other if you falter; no seriously, reply Darkover, who in their right mind would let themselves put up with all this? yes, if I asked the question in this way, "no one" would answer you, but in the meantime that's exactly what they do, not only do they remove you from the quiescence of non-existence but they also deprive you of the bliss of the mother's womb, the most joyful place you can ever experience in this world, to then throw you into the oscillating pendulum of suffering and joy, the latter not always guaranteed, but which you constantly seek like a crazy heroin addict slave, precisely, to that state of well-being that was your mother's womb, but which you now seek in every possible surrogate;

there is nothing more selfish than giving birth to someone in this world, but why then? for your own expectations, for your own desires, for your own tortures, for having been the victim of the evolutionary and genetic traps that led you to do what you did, that is, perpetuate the human burden.

 

[Kali_Yuga13]

Excellent post and I have been deconstructing the idea of the "gift of life" lately myself. The gift of life is more accurately described as an imposed condition of the spirit or consciousness one has to deal with. Without an ability to assess the gift before receiving it to give us the opportunity to say "thanks, but no thanks" or get rid of the gift, it can't really be called a gift. We can't be said to have free will without the ability to decline said gift or rid ourselves of the gift with reasonable effort. Adding another dimension to this is the prevailing religious thought that if we chose to willfully stop this gift, we are threatened with eternal punishment.

I follow a couple of Christian subs in reddit and the question of suicide and hell is a regular occurrence. I think a lot of Christians just want to be on what they feel is the winning team and eagerly anticipate watching others burn in hell in the same way people relish in the opposing teams loss in a superbowl game.

I also think about the "selfishness" accusations against the suicidal. Any while yes, there are narcissistic suicides that are intended to cause harm the vast majority of suicidal people would gladly bestow their remaining "gift of life" to a worthy or appreciative recipient if that were at all possible like in the movie "In Time".

 

[PhilosopherInAV0id]

First of all, a gift for whom? After all, you can't give something to someone who doesn't exist. It's not that there was someone who really wanted to exist and their parents decided to grant them existence; there was no one before people decided that there would be someone, someone who didn't want, ask, or would have been disappointed if they hadn't received, the "gift" of existence. So if anything it is a gift to the parents, or to the parents of the parents who pushed for grandchildren, or to the consumer society that got another consumer, or to the state because there is another tax payer, or to the army because there is another soldier, etc. But it is certainly not a gift for those who did not exist before receiving it. Regardless of someone's quality of life, before someone existed they did not want it and therefore the created is the last to receive a gift.

Since it is not necessary, not desirable, and not in anyone's interest to exist, and since the creation of a person does not move someone to a better state, since before someone existed s/he was not in any state, there is no logic in treating the creation of a person as some kind of benefit. Reproduction is not a gift but an unnecessary creation of a vulnerable person who will inevitably experience unnecessary harms.

Beyond that, gifts are something you get for free, not something you have to work for, and for almost a lifetime.
Something is not a gift if I cannot choose not to use it. And in the case of life, keeping it in a drawer or passing it on to someone else is not an option. Everyone has to use their life in one way or another. There is no exchange note. Even ending one's life, even at a very young age, requires the use of this "gift". Which of course makes it at least not a gift. So even if you insist that life is a good thing, it is certainly not a gift and it is not granted to anyone. People are created, if their lives are relatively good then the compulsion done to them is less bad than cases of bad lives, but that does not retroactively make this compulsion a gift or something that is granted to someone.

A gift you receive for free, and you can choose to enjoy it or ignore it, but it is unlikely that gifts will harm the person who receives them. Life, on the other hand, is not something you get for free, you have to work hard for it non-stop, you can't ignore life, and it can definitely hurt those who receive it. To enjoy a gift you usually just have to use it. To enjoy life you have to work hard. And unlike gifts, if you ignore life very quickly you suffer from hunger, thirst, pain, heat, cold, boredom, frustration, loneliness, etc. It is not possible to store life somewhere and ignore it. Therefore, even if you insist that life is good, it is surely not a gift.
A gift is not something that is forced. Gifts can be returned or passed up. And gifts usually don't end in death.

W.O.W. Y.E.S. Absolutely amazing. I strive to think like this. You are an amazing person if you can think this way. I have always thought about this question in particular, because I never asked for a choice nor was given one in the matter of my birth, and all I have been doing since is regretting it. Bullseye aim right there.

 

[humblebragging]

To enjoy a gift you usually just have to use it. To enjoy life you have to work hard.

Congratulations, you finally figured it out

 

[Darkover]

Congratulations, you finally figured it out

you took it out of context, you can work hard all your life and have nothing to show for it, sooner or later everything dies