Discussion Why is anti-natalism an unpopular philosophy?

[tommyhalpinkelly]

People say life is suffering and everyone has problems (which I don't believe). These anti-suicide platitudes actually serve to nullify the argument of living as well as procreating.

What is the point in life though? I know there's no objective meaning but there's simply too much suffering which requires no effort while happiness require extreme effort to attain which is fleeting. So, why don't more people end their lives and moreso, why do they keep having children?

I suppose sex is too attracting.

 

[stargazer]

People say life is suffering and everyone has problems (which I don't believe). These anti-suicide platitudes actually serve to nullify the argument of living as well as procreating.

What is the point in life though? I know there's no objective meaning but there's simply too much suffering which requires no effort while happiness require extreme effort to attain which is fleeting. So, why don't more people end their lives and moreso, why do they keep having children?

I suppose sex is too attracting.

To your last line, correction: unprotected sex. That's probably the cause in part. And wanting someone to look after them/their communities in older age. Until robots can fill the void of a lack of workforce recruits.

 

[weedoge]

Because, even though suffering is natural, suffering isn't necessarily bad enough for the majority of people to make life not worth living. For me the issue with anti natalism is that it suggests we know that an unborn child would prefer to stay unborn than be given a chance. Or that that child shouldn't get a chance because then it will also have the chance to suffer.

I'm not really an anti natalist, even if I think most parents are idiots and wish I was never born, its "normal" to have kids and a family, I don't find it surprising that things continue the way they are.

 

[Life sucks]

First of all, life has inherently suffering and problems that none can avoid. Being hungry or dying that are unavoidable. It is like being in debt to nature and constantly keeping to feed, fix or anything to your body which will tire you with time. Even if we assume someone "doesn't have problems", that doesn't mean they aren't prone to problems.

Second, the level of suffering doesn't necessarily indicate the result. Some people choose to end their lives and some choose to not have children with minimal amounts of suffering and vice-versa.

Lastly, many have the wrong idea and don't understand antinatalism well. Even if we assume some people have "good life" it doesn't mean it will happen 100%. And with the probability of having big problems or bad life isn't 0% and actually not a small percentage, it becomes a form of gambling. Then why should one gamble with newborn lives? That's all assuming the parent is good and is thinking and not a shitty one which this world has many of. Misunderstanding it is one of the reasons why its unpopular.


The biggest reason for unpopularity is the extremely heavy biological behavior and extremely heavy indoctrination (religious, society,.. etc ). And humans most likely won't think much about it and when many of them think or know it, its too late already. Not to mention how natalism is what the states and systems want, notice how they increase or decrease it but never prevent it. For the system, its just a number that keeps it continuing and it doesn't want very low number that breaks it. Its complicated but simply its like a flow

 

[TAW122]

All good answers, and I think the biggest one is the human instinct of reproduction, biological impulses and what not.

 

[sadak_the_wanderer]

I might throw in a nod to evolution. People who see the futility of life, who do not want to inflict suffering on potential children, have fewer children. This ends up selecting for people who have an outlook that is particularly rosy.

Imagine the first hominids who grasped death and suffering, who understood that birth inevitably resulted in pain and decay. You would get a wave of them who invent suicide, but beyond that, many would make a decision not to reproduce (once they understood that sex made babies). Now, we end up with people who are genetically predisposed not to think about these things, to interpret the world in a way that avoids considering the future in a realistic manner.

 

[Smilla]

Unconscious fear of death issues would be another reason—wanting to be immortal through DNA.

All great answers.

 

[worldexploder]

Because anti-natalism makes too much sense. People are addicted to spreading their DNA molecules to the next generation.