|
Alonzo
Stranger

Registered: 08/06/16
Posts: 30
Last seen: 5 years, 10 months
|
Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad)
#23563230 - 08/21/16 03:17 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I read about this on Wikipedia and found it interesting. See Antinatalism
Quote:
Then I looked again at all the acts of oppression which were being done under the sun. And behold I saw the tears of the oppressed and that they had no one to comfort them; and on the side of their oppressors was power, but they had no one to comfort them. So I congratulated the dead who are already dead more than the living who are still living. But better off than both of them is the one who has never existed, who has never seen the evil activity that is done under the sun.
Quote:
The world is ruled by the will to live; a blind, irrational force, manifested by wanting, which constantly strives to manifest itself, however, is never satisfied with its manifestations which are the cause of suffering. Existence is filled with suffering. In the world there is more pain than pleasure; happiness and the pleasure of thousands are not able to compensate for the anguish and agony of a single one, and all things considered it would be better if life had never occurred. The essence of ethical conduct is compassion and the denial of the will to live consisting in overcoming one’s own desires through asceticism. Once we deny the will to live, placing a human being in the world is a superfluous, senseless, and very questionable moral action.
Quote:
I do not understand how anyone can procreate without certain knowledge of the ultimate cosmic destination of those they bring into the world. It is beyond my comprehension that people do this. It seems to me that the sensible thing to do would be to await certain knowledge. If certain knowledge does not come (which would probably mean a knowledge shared by the entire human race), I would have thought that one would have to ask the question, "Why on Earth do I want to have children? What am I thinking of?
Buddhists say life is suffering. Why doom a child or any being to a life on Earth?
|
falcon



Registered: 04/01/02
Posts: 8,005
Last seen: 1 day, 2 hours
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: Alonzo]
#23563272 - 08/21/16 03:34 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Is this a multiple choice, if so I'll take your second quote as my answer.
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: Alonzo] 1
#23563329 - 08/21/16 03:58 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Overpopulation is a crisis, and I feel most of our problems are the direct or indirect result of such a huge population straining the ecosystems of Earth. If things are not to get worse, we need to get a handle on this. Thing is, that's not going to happen. The population is projected to be from ten to twelve billion human souls within fifty years from now. This is completely unacceptable. And yet, it is unavoidable. We passed the point of no return many decades ago, and it's going to be hard to get to a point where all of the mouths to feed are full. I am all for having many fewer offspring, especially in the third world, but once they're here ya gotta love 'em.
I personally plan to intentionally refrain from having children during my lifetime. I feel it is the right thing to do. It could indeed be argued that bringing additional souls into this hell-mess is immoral -- could easily be argued. But this crisis is going to get worse before it gets better, and we just have to buckle up for it. There's nothing anyone can do.
Time just to sit back and enjoy the crisis.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: Alonzo]
#23563374 - 08/21/16 04:23 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Alonzo said:
Quote:
I do not understand how anyone can procreate without certain knowledge of the ultimate cosmic destination of those they bring into the world.
Celibacy of monks and Nuns is an ancient practice. If they are 'good' monks and nuns they don't judge others harshly.
Hormones and genes run the show or none of us would be here. Of those who choose not to procreate, how many masturbate and fantasize? Of those who think they are choosing a relationship with a woman who isn't into having kids in her youth, how many find that when the 'biological clock starts seriously ticking' say around 30, strangely birth control measures somehow fuck up - (pun intended). Then the guy gets 'sentimental', and once again, frequently in actuality, hormones and genes run the show, not conscious intentions.
Dispassion is a hard nut to crack!
Edited by laughingdog (08/21/16 04:34 PM)
|
Crumist
Stranger


Registered: 11/02/13
Posts: 781
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: I am all for having many fewer offspring, especially in the third world,
I don't think thats quite fair. Per person and in total, I think it is the inhabitants in the first world nations that consume far more (rather wastefully as it stands) food, water, labor, land, housing, etc.
[Quote] but once they're here ya gotta love 'em.
I agree with you there. There's no morale alternative.
That "life is suffering" is a truism and impossible to disprove. I see the question more as one of consent. A parent can not ask their child permission before giving birth (that is making the single most important decision to the child's existence) At current rates of declining fertility, maybe extinction or extremely rare pregnancies are our species' date (all intelligent life's fate?)
-------------------- 'I am all for resources being allocated to the widowed single mother of 3, lost husband over seas fighting for our country. I am for vets getting mental health access and resources following war. I am not for free money cause a woman can't close her legs or some chump with low testosterone no going to work cause "i'm sad."' -finalexplosion Nice knowin ya'll! https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/23904704/vc/1#23904704
|
Mental Taco



Registered: 07/02/14
Posts: 2,290
Loc: Hell
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: Crumist]
#23564415 - 08/21/16 10:10 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Overpopulation is a serious issue that i believe governments wont address until its too late. Weve simplified life and made it so easy that we have few limiting factors so we cheat natural selection somewhat.,,
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: Crumist]
#23564493 - 08/21/16 10:44 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Crumist said:
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: I am all for having many fewer offspring, especially in the third world,
I don't think thats quite fair. Per person and in total, I think it is the inhabitants in the first world nations that consume far more (rather wastefully as it stands) food, water, labor, land, housing, etc.
[Quote] but once they're here ya gotta love 'em.
I agree with you there. There's no morale alternative.
That "life is suffering" is a truism and impossible to disprove. I see the question more as one of consent. A parent can not ask their child permission before giving birth (that is making the single most important decision to the child's existence) At current rates of declining fertility, maybe extinction or extremely rare pregnancies are our species' date (all intelligent life's fate?)
You are right that first world people consume more resources, but the birth rate is far higher in the developing world. Total fertility in the U.S., for example, is almost five times lower than in some African countries. The greater strain on available resources is in the developing world, and given the horrendous environmental circumstances in most of those countries, I think it can be said that that is where the crux of the overpopulation crisis lies. But populations are expected to rise in most places; Europe is I believe the only place where it is going to level off and decline a bit. The matter is academic, anyway -- populations rising almost everywhere over the next fifty years spells serious doom. The planet was simply never, ever meant to support this many humans, no matter how many tricks we have up our sleeves.
|
zzripz
Stranger


Registered: 12/23/08
Posts: 8,292
Loc: Manchester, UK
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
|
|
I am always trying to find ways to undermine the evil greedy rotten ones who grab as much land money and all resources as they can
In their propaganda-stories over many generations they have WANTED people to procreate, and called ecstatic non-procreational sensuality and sexuality the most heinous sin. In fact sin in Hebrew actually means 'missing the mark'~~~sexually this would refer to the male sperm being shed away from 'where it is intended'!
They WANT their slaves to procreate because...? because they want continuous slaves to maintain their civilizations. A 'work force', and mindless soldiers.
Notice that although, as said above, birth rates in the 'modern' world have decreased, the same elites know they can create hellish conditions and beliefs in the 'developing' world to make sure their increase, and then see to it they can both exploit the people there and influx these slaves into the regions with the low birth rates making sure to keep their slaves popping out
Ancient Gnostic sects were against procreation because they believed that the world, and nature was evil and itself was made by an evil demiurge to entrap us, and so they did not want to give birth to entrap more spirits
But for me, IF you want kids, the most intelligent thing is to REALLY educate yourselves and share this knowledge with your children so more and more of us can undermine this matrix once and for all
Edited by zzripz (08/22/16 05:38 AM)
|
Crumist
Stranger


Registered: 11/02/13
Posts: 781
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said:
You are right that first world people consume more resources, but the birth rate is far higher in the developing world. Total fertility in the U.S., for example, is almost five times lower than in some African countries. The greater strain on available resources is in the developing world, and given the horrendous environmental circumstances in most of those countries, I think it can be said that that is where the crux of the overpopulation crisis lies. But populations are expected to rise in most places; Europe is I believe the only place where it is going to level off and decline a bit. The matter is academic, anyway -- populations rising almost everywhere over the next fifty years spells serious doom. The planet was simply never, ever meant to support this many humans, no matter how many tricks we have up our sleeves.
Iirc, it is demonstrable that the first world uses far and away more resources. Basics like water, a single American uses several times what a large 3rd world family does, the acreage and manpower to produce an American meal would similarly provide a 3rd world family with more than a week of food, oh and then 75% gets thrown away. Many aspire to mcMansions, their private pool, multiple yearly vacations, several cars, a couple 90" tvs, etc. Of course, I suppose every individual gets to decide how to spend their money, but that wasn't the question.
-------------------- 'I am all for resources being allocated to the widowed single mother of 3, lost husband over seas fighting for our country. I am for vets getting mental health access and resources following war. I am not for free money cause a woman can't close her legs or some chump with low testosterone no going to work cause "i'm sad."' -finalexplosion Nice knowin ya'll! https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/23904704/vc/1#23904704
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: Crumist]
#23565505 - 08/22/16 10:04 AM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
You make a good point, I see no fault with your logic. The U.S. comprises four percent of the world's population, yet consumes roughly 25% of its available resources. A lot of that is due to the fact that the U.S. landmass is the richest resource-base in the world. But, as you begin to suggest, everyone can't live at our standard of living. Something's got to give. That's one of the reasons why the population at large is simply too big.
The U.S. does use more than its fair share, but conditions in the developing world are truly horrendous, and overpopulation there is clearly a crisis. How about we just agree that things are fucked up all over?
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
Crumist
Stranger


Registered: 11/02/13
Posts: 781
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: The U.S. does use more than its fair share, but conditions in the developing world are truly horrendous, and overpopulation there is clearly a crisis. How about we just agree that things are fucked up all over?
That things are fucked up I can totally agree on. What I'm trying to get at is there's something wrong about 1st worlders scolding developing nations for having high fertility rates when the ecological impact is negligible to 1st world consumption and also, infant morality rates have only recently seen a decrease. If life was hard because you were the only surviving child of 7, why would you listen to some foreigner saying 2-3 children is best?
But yeah, stuffs fucked. I think a relevant question is "are you glad you were born"
-------------------- 'I am all for resources being allocated to the widowed single mother of 3, lost husband over seas fighting for our country. I am for vets getting mental health access and resources following war. I am not for free money cause a woman can't close her legs or some chump with low testosterone no going to work cause "i'm sad."' -finalexplosion Nice knowin ya'll! https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/23904704/vc/1#23904704
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: Crumist]
#23566472 - 08/22/16 04:13 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I see your point. Yes, Uncle Sam can be damned sanctimonious with other sovereign nations.
"The planet is fine. The people are fucked." --George Carlin
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said: Overpopulation is a crisis, and I feel most of our problems are the direct or indirect result of such a huge population straining the ecosystems of Earth. If things are not to get worse, we need to get a handle on this. Thing is, that's not going to happen. The population is projected to be from ten to twelve billion human souls within fifty years from now. This is completely unacceptable. And yet, it is unavoidable. We passed the point of no return many decades ago, and it's going to be hard to get to a point where all of the mouths to feed are full. I am all for having many fewer offspring, especially in the third world, but once they're here ya gotta love 'em.
I personally plan to intentionally refrain from having children during my lifetime. I feel it is the right thing to do. It could indeed be argued that bringing additional souls into this hell-mess is immoral -- could easily be argued. But this crisis is going to get worse before it gets better, and we just have to buckle up for it. There's nothing anyone can do.
Time just to sit back and enjoy the crisis.
and watch as everyone complains about socialism and totalitarianism, while the fat-cats who can help pay for what they manipulated to serve them, to make them fat-cats, just sit rich and pretty, till they die and pass on their shit to their families, whom are probably groomed from birth to be just as avaricious.
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: akira_akuma] 1
#23566967 - 08/22/16 06:53 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Yep.
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
nothing exists
master of fire

Registered: 12/15/10
Posts: 289
Last seen: 6 years, 7 months
|
|
procreation stops the individual from progress away from karma. by extension, any thing that is created has a potential to incur karmic energy. this is the wisdom of being unattached.
-------------------- i like you...
|
r72rock
Maybe so. Maybe not.




Registered: 01/06/09
Posts: 1,327
Loc: Chicago
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: Alonzo]
#23568897 - 08/23/16 11:33 AM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I feel that some are missing the issue. It's not saying that it's immoral to procreate because of the current state of affairs in the world, but it's arguing that procreation is always immoral. The act itself is immoral.
Quote:
Alonzo said: I read about this on Wikipedia and found it interesting. See Antinatalism
Quote:
Then I looked again at all the acts of oppression which were being done under the sun. And behold I saw the tears of the oppressed and that they had no one to comfort them; and on the side of their oppressors was power, but they had no one to comfort them. So I congratulated the dead who are already dead more than the living who are still living. But better off than both of them is the one who has never existed, who has never seen the evil activity that is done under the sun.
Quote:
The world is ruled by the will to live; a blind, irrational force, manifested by wanting, which constantly strives to manifest itself, however, is never satisfied with its manifestations which are the cause of suffering. Existence is filled with suffering. In the world there is more pain than pleasure; happiness and the pleasure of thousands are not able to compensate for the anguish and agony of a single one, and all things considered it would be better if life had never occurred. The essence of ethical conduct is compassion and the denial of the will to live consisting in overcoming one’s own desires through asceticism. Once we deny the will to live, placing a human being in the world is a superfluous, senseless, and very questionable moral action.
Quote:
I do not understand how anyone can procreate without certain knowledge of the ultimate cosmic destination of those they bring into the world. It is beyond my comprehension that people do this. It seems to me that the sensible thing to do would be to await certain knowledge. If certain knowledge does not come (which would probably mean a knowledge shared by the entire human race), I would have thought that one would have to ask the question, "Why on Earth do I want to have children? What am I thinking of?
Buddhists say life is suffering. Why doom a child or any being to a life on Earth?
Wikipedia's entry on antinatalism (or most philosophy entries for that matter) is terrible. It's just a bunch of naive reasoning thrown together that sort of sum up reasons why someone would be against procreation, coupled with some poetic aphorisms. It's an unhelpful and misleading defense of the position, with a laughable "criticism" section that doesn't say anything useful, all the while stretching the words of some of the people cited on there. I've linked/referenced some stuff below if you're interested in exploring the topic.
The form of antinatlism that you allude to could be called Benatar's antinatalism (a position famously defended by David Benatar), where he argues that the sufferings of the world outweigh the pleasures of the world, and thus, we shouldn't procreate because it's the "root of all evil" because procreation allowing suffering. If no one existed, then there would be no suffering. This is a hard position to defend, but he defends it.
Since it's a hard position to defend, there are other reasons that people defend antinatalism. Other's hold that it's an asymmetrical attitude that we have towards procreation. There seems to be a duty to not give birth to someone if we know that they'll be born with some horrible disease, or in a less than favorable state of affairs, but there doesn't seem to be a duty to give birth. If a couple gives birth to a child and they know that they can't raise that child, it seems cruel and immoral for the parents to have a child. But if a couple doesn't have a child, we don't think they're immoral for not having children. So if there's no duty to give birth, why would we do it?
And others hold that it's a consent issue. People can't consent to birth and forcing them existence on them is immoral because it's done without consent.
These are the 3 major motivations of antinatlism. If you're interested in them, I'd check out Benatar's Better To Have Never Been if you're interested in his arguments and flavor of antinatalism. Seana Shiffrin argued the consent issue in her paper entitled Wrongful Life, Procreative Responsibility, and the Significance of Harm, and Christopher Belshaw wrote a paper called A New Argument for Antinatalism, where he argues from those asymmetrical attitudes that I mentioned earlier about not starting lives that are bad.
-------------------- Current favorite candy: Peanut Butter Kisses
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: r72rock]
#23569513 - 08/23/16 03:38 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
without fucking what in the flying hell fuck are people supposed to do. run amok?
|
Crumist
Stranger


Registered: 11/02/13
Posts: 781
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: r72rock]
#23569870 - 08/23/16 05:45 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Thus spake the philosophy minor: "/thread"
Going to check out those links tho
-------------------- 'I am all for resources being allocated to the widowed single mother of 3, lost husband over seas fighting for our country. I am for vets getting mental health access and resources following war. I am not for free money cause a woman can't close her legs or some chump with low testosterone no going to work cause "i'm sad."' -finalexplosion Nice knowin ya'll! https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/23904704/vc/1#23904704
|
r72rock
Maybe so. Maybe not.




Registered: 01/06/09
Posts: 1,327
Loc: Chicago
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: Crumist]
#23570163 - 08/23/16 06:55 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
akira_akuma said: without fucking what in the flying hell fuck are people supposed to do. run amok?
lol, enjoy life and wait for human extinction?
Quote:
Crumist said: Thus spake the philosophy minor: "/thread"
Going to check out those links tho
Or it's a topic that I find interesting and am passionate about. I hope it's not the end of the thread. It's a broad topic. I just personally felt that the Wikipedia article did a bad job presenting the point. If you do check out those links, lemme know what you think of them.
-------------------- Current favorite candy: Peanut Butter Kisses
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: r72rock]
#23570506 - 08/23/16 08:30 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
r72rock said:
And others hold that it's a consent issue. People can't consent to birth and forcing them existence on them is immoral because it's done without consent.
seems silly assumes everything else people do is highly moral assumes people have free will assumes a self that exists before birth assumes that this preexisting self is mature and has an opinion on the subject
It's (the 'consent issue') what I call a facsimile of profundity
|
r72rock
Maybe so. Maybe not.




Registered: 01/06/09
Posts: 1,327
Loc: Chicago
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: laughingdog]
#23570671 - 08/23/16 09:11 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
laughingdog said:
Quote:
r72rock said:
And others hold that it's a consent issue. People can't consent to birth and forcing them existence on them is immoral because it's done without consent.
seems silly assumes everything else people do is highly moral assumes people have free will assumes a self that exists before birth assumes that this preexisting self is mature and has an opinion on the subject
It's (the 'consent issue') what I call a facsimile of profundity
I don't know if it's so easy to dismiss as "silly", but I definitely agree with you that it assumes a lot. It sounds odd to say that both a person doesn't exist (as they do before they're born) and they have the moral status of a living adult.
Quote:
assumes everything else people do is highly moral
It is sort of counter intuitive to say that procreation is immoral. I guess that's why I find the topic so interesting hah. It's a very extreme thing to say.
-------------------- Current favorite candy: Peanut Butter Kisses
|
laughingdog
Stranger

Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,828
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: r72rock]
#23571106 - 08/23/16 10:51 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
moral or immoral or amoral, having kids is a horrendous commitment and responsibility (and universities aren't cheap) and although probably most parents do their best, looking at the world, the results don't seem impressive to me. If it wasn't for instinct, and it's companion culture many would avoid it. The days when kids were needed on the farm, are over in the 1st world, if not the 3rd. But instinct is not over.
as they say one needs a license to drive a car, but not to be a parent
|
Crumist
Stranger


Registered: 11/02/13
Posts: 781
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: laughingdog]
#23574287 - 08/24/16 09:38 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I live alone or with a like minded companion and I strive to live simple, beater car, a small apartment in an "undesirable" area, enjoy DIYing as much as possible. Minimal possessions.
Make me responsible for the creation of a human being and I would have to imagine that it all changes. The "right" zip code with good schools, the newest and safest car, crib, toys, appliances.
Manage to soften ones own desires, and you will desire for others.
-------------------- 'I am all for resources being allocated to the widowed single mother of 3, lost husband over seas fighting for our country. I am for vets getting mental health access and resources following war. I am not for free money cause a woman can't close her legs or some chump with low testosterone no going to work cause "i'm sad."' -finalexplosion Nice knowin ya'll! https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/23904704/vc/1#23904704
|
niteman
Registered: 06/29/11
Posts: 1,050
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: Alonzo]
#23574760 - 08/25/16 12:58 AM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I have been lured back to the shroomery from a long ababsence because I was drawn in curiously to this thread. I was reading (admittedly while on meth) about subjects relating to existenstialism and antinatalism and even an enlightened voluntary extinction for a few days now. What I have is the opinion that it is better to prevent existence and therefore suffering than to facilitate such suffering however small the probability. My ideal view of our acceptance of the responsibility of humans as an animal blessed/cursed with self awareness to the point of acknowledgment of the inevitibility of our own mortality to somehow tranascend the animalist nature of the will to live Instead perhaps such a (possibly only perceived) duty would involve the realization that we may have not only outlived our usefulness; we have become unacceptable to the needs of the majority of this planet.
It is true that tragically some of our beloved "pets" are but slaves to our existence and would most likely not thrive and many that breeding dogs, especially for the purpose of obtain traits that humans desire, is a selfish and reprehensible act. That said we have a responsibility to the animals we domesticate and to anything we impact. I see the problem as the lack of human will to sterilize domesticated animals, look after them util their extinction then when we are sure we can no longer cause more harm than good; we choose to opt out of procreation voluntarily and with the knowledge we cannot cause anymore harm
It is not an easy concept to grasp and it is hard to determine the power of the will to live vs the realization of our possible choice to remove ourselves from the equation on the basis the possibility of causing exponentially greater suffering compared to the amount of pleasure.
I actually view it as a beautifully selfless concept and Ibam contemplating voluntarily choosing to not procreate. The truth is though anything other than birth control or abstinence is unnaceptable including suicide, forced sterilization, genocide, etc ) is a bad means to a humble and noble end. Ideally we should enjoy life accept death and acknowledge all possibilities of any concious existence after death or before life are possible as well as impossible to prove nor possible to disprove. This means we can only make our decisions based a variety of factors, thoughts, and stimuli. We do not have the luxury of kowing the perception of anyone but ourselves and we will possibly never grasp a meaning or value to attach t our lives with sincerity so why should we choose to create vessels of further confusion and anguish because we fear the absence of existence
It is not at all plausible to convince even a small portion of the worlds population to fight the urge to reproduce unless we experience some sort of awakening or enlightenment.
All we can do is make personal decisions based on our opinions or beliefs. If you believe it will prevent further suffering to voluntarily opt out of reproduction, then you may choose to do so. We cannot however force anyone to make the decision or agree to any ideaolgy. That would infringe on free will which is central to the very socially dependent human animal. Also remember in the words of the rock band Rush "If you choose to not decide you still have made a choice."
I ask is there a possibility that we are but a natural selection experiment on th utility of different awareness and if so only two outcomes exist survival and evolution or extinction and removal from the gene pool and the biological equation entirely. If we truly care for our planet and the life dependent on its existence we have to at least consider we may be doing much more harm than we can justify by existing.
We do not fear death. We fear the absence of knowing and the lack of control we are used to.
I love that this thread revived my interest in the shroomery and supplies an outlet to articulate my thoughts, questions,and opinions. Uncertainty is a hreat to survival of life and as such is by its nature intimidating an instills fear and despair but the absence of knowing is the absence of feeling pain nor pleasure. The absence of existance is the absence of ppositive or negative perception and is therefore devoid of the possibility if pain or despair.
TL;DR IN SUMMARY: I agree wih the principles of antinatalisn while I do not agree with abortion because It involves the destruction of an existing life no matter what that life form may feel. Instead I advocate the safe use of birth control or abstinence as well as adoption for anyone wishing to volunarily make the decision to forego reproduction for the good of our morality or the benefit of the planet.
Sorry about the length but this is an awesome thread I found at a great time in my life. I must explore this forum further thank you!
|
niteman
Registered: 06/29/11
Posts: 1,050
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: niteman]
#23574806 - 08/25/16 01:17 AM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
I also have a thought that perhaps that true courage comes not by accepting the knowledge but by recognizing ones ignorance of any existence whether perceived as positive or negative. We are but animals with egos unable to understand life nor death and unable to justify nor likely ever attain true immortality and. If we never experienced pain we would not know true pleasure and vice versa. The absence of existence is absolute nothing. Neither good nor bad yinnor yang. Neutrality and devoid of anything. Ignorance as a concept may be confusing and depressing bit in practice it is a blissful lack of suffering and the burden of the awareness of existance and mortality.
|
zzripz
Stranger


Registered: 12/23/08
Posts: 8,292
Loc: Manchester, UK
Last seen: 4 years, 7 months
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: niteman]
#23575006 - 08/25/16 04:22 AM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
We are but animals with egos unable to understand life nor death and unable to justify nor likely ever attain true immortality
In the ancient Goddess religion of the Great Mother, which the warrior patriarchal cultures have suppressed 'immortality' wasn't understood like their oppressors had it--eg as everlasting 'life' where 'death' has been conquered, because that is typical dualistic thinking as was imposed on one and all by the warrior-obsessed mindset. This is why a central symbol for the Goddess mythos is the Serpent which symbolizes the putting on of new skin via cycles. The serpent cloughs off old skin and underneath is new skin, and so we are born, age, die and what we are--which involves utter interrelatedness with the universe forms as another organism. This is hard for people indoctrinated in dualistic thinking to understand because they see the world in black or white. There can be no ambiguity in their world, and this is why you find so much misogyny, racism, homophobia, misothery (fear and hatred of animals). Thus that mindset cannot understand the dynamic which is life and death and regeneration. For they it HAS to be one or the other!
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: zzripz]
#23575670 - 08/25/16 10:42 AM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
that is true.
regeneration is central to alot of the themes we viralize and make vindictive, along with it, death and life, and sex, and "gender", and race, and whoa...misothery...never heard of that one before.
it's what creates the sickness. war. serial killers. gangs. criminality.
we aren't nomads anymore. too bad zzripz has me blocked.
|
LunarEclipse
Enlil's Official Story


Registered: 10/31/04
Posts: 21,407
Loc: Building 7
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: Alonzo]
#23576769 - 08/25/16 04:56 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
-------------------- Anxiety is what you make it.
Edited by LunarEclipse (08/25/16 05:07 PM)
|
Alonzo
Stranger

Registered: 08/06/16
Posts: 30
Last seen: 5 years, 10 months
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: akira_akuma]
#23577665 - 08/25/16 08:54 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
akira_akuma said: without fucking what in the flying hell fuck are people supposed to do. run amok?
Wow. Well you are right, we can't forget that we're animals, and animals do enjoy the opportunity to fornicate. Nature has us like programmed to have babies and who doesn't like sexual activity? I think there are some ethical issues parents should consider when they want to make a baby because in general they do curse them to sickness, death, and suffering. But I'm sure a lot of people are more interested in fornicating than they are about the baby that could result, so...
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ


Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: Alonzo]
#23577926 - 08/25/16 10:25 PM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
yeah...and? the baby is doomed to sickness, death, and suffering, no matter what.
|
Alonzo
Stranger

Registered: 08/06/16
Posts: 30
Last seen: 5 years, 10 months
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: akira_akuma]
#23578563 - 08/26/16 04:32 AM (7 years, 5 months ago) |
|
|
It is immoral to "doom" anyone to anything, usually. Tbh I'd be willing to join or even form a group to bring awareness to this issue. Maybe doing so would help fight overpopulation, reduce the welfare pop, encourage adoption or whatever.
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder



Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 3 days
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: Alonzo]
#23598677 - 08/31/16 07:21 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I never had the desire to become a father, so I married an 'ice princess' of a woman. Actually, we never even discussed children over the 2 1/2 years we were engaged. Then we married and didn't discuss children until one day after we had been married for 3 years and I had completed my first year of employment. I was heading to a workshop and she asked me to get the number of the closest pay phone. She was going to call me at the workshop to pick her up from having a medical procedure - a tubal ligation! She never discussed this with me, she just made the appointment, saying "Life is too difficult to bring children into it." As it turned out, I had married a Borderline Personality Disordered woman with Antisocial and Sadistic features. She also became a raging alcoholic during the 9 years we lived together in Miami after living together at grad school.
I am very happy that my ex didn't become a mother to a child or children with me. I didn't think to divorce her at the time (not for another 6 years when I discovered infidelity), but I have not regretted not being a father. I find that my friends who became 'family guys' were actually rather uninteresting comrades. One former friend married a woman some 8 years his senior (he ad a Mother Complex) and she turned him into some political conservative asshole (with a son and a daughter) from being a regular tripper.
Another childhood friend did well financially (a couple of homes, one at the Jersey shore with a boat, etc.), but he and his wife have no intellectual life, no spiritual life than I ever discerned, unless the Protestant Work Ethic could be considered as being a surrogate religion. He couldn't handle a cannabis high in high school, so he neither ever took a life-changing psychedelic. His wife posts pics of their grand-babies just being babies. My wife said "Get a life!" and I thought that she, being a mother herself, would like those insipid Facebook vids. Nope. She thinks it's stupid and boring.
Yet another acquaintance and his wife with a son and daughter whom we knew for 20 years raised at least one spoiled brat, they both worked hard as school teachers but neither had an intellectual or spiritual life. This couple were the two MOST boring, uncurious people I've ever known, hands down. They were 'nice' and invited us to dinners and not until the end did either DO anything to offend me so I never simply dumped them. For 5 years I avoided returning phone calls until Sunday after the weekend was over.
The first two family guys withdrew from me after they were married, partly at the pressure of their wives who didn't like me continuing to influence their husbands. They were childhood friends, but it was their choice. Neither one liked to read or contemplate, so they put their energies into family life. The third person I met as an adult, whose wife admitted on MDMA that she was a shallow person and who teased her husband that he had read one book since college. My BFF discovered that family life wasn't for him, something happened between his ex-wife and himself that I was never clear about, but he became the absentee, child-support paying father. Today he has 3 grandchildren but has never me the third one. Instead, he helped raise a late girlfriend's two kids when she died suddenly, and now involves himself in his current wife's family's kids (perhaps compensation for his own failure as a father). In a Bill Moyers interview with Joseph Campbell, somewhere he makes a comment about someone saying in effect, 'he's a philosopher, what would he want with children?'
I have no dislike of (good) kids, I counseled them for 27 years, but I didn't have to raise one, which even in my youth was too much responsibility. I thought that if I wanted to be free and wander, or even kill myself (I wasn't too healthy-minded then) that I just couldn't ethically abandon a child. Plus, without a strong desire to be a parent, I was opposed to do so as some obligation to make my parents grandparents for the last few years of their lives (as my asshole brother berated me), and I hadn't met a woman whom I wanted to bear a child of mine. Ultimately I had no desire of my own. I advise NOT becoming a parent unless one is going to make it your priority in life.
-------------------- γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
Crumist
Stranger


Registered: 11/02/13
Posts: 781
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
I advise NOT becoming a parent unless one is going to make it your priority in life. 
Interesting read. Has anyone ever told you that you come off as a bit judgemental, though?
As far as children *having* to be the one and only thing in a parent's life, I am conflicted. People talk wistfully of the days when children played outside and were independent and the parents were freer to raise children how they wished. Ive often heard parents talk about how raising their child is the single most important thing in their life and their sole focus.
Has all of the helicopter parenting and smothering and child-rearing books really yielded a net benefit for the child or the family?
-------------------- 'I am all for resources being allocated to the widowed single mother of 3, lost husband over seas fighting for our country. I am for vets getting mental health access and resources following war. I am not for free money cause a woman can't close her legs or some chump with low testosterone no going to work cause "i'm sad."' -finalexplosion Nice knowin ya'll! https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/23904704/vc/1#23904704
|
TameMe
Stranger



Registered: 10/24/05
Posts: 2,734
Last seen: 5 years, 3 months
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: zzripz]
#23599144 - 08/31/16 09:28 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
zzripz said:
Ancient Gnostic sects were against procreation because they believed that the world, and nature was evil and itself was made by an evil demiurge to entrap us, and so they did not want to give birth to entrap more spirits
got any references on reading up on those sects? they sound interesting.
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder



Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 3 days
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: Crumist]
#23604371 - 09/02/16 11:22 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Judgemental? Perhaps, but I think not. I have a sharply discriminating mind, and I'm describing situations. I am disappointed that a few childhood friends gave up their freedom to be themselves and acquiesced to wives who were selected primarily by unconscious determinants (I know because I made the same error the first time), and who married women who took over the role of an externalized Super-ego. That facilitated a permanent riff between us. Maybe this is the nature of things, but my BFF and I have bee friends since we were 30 months old. He is closer to me in feelings and values than my hostile and estranged biological brother. Neither his two wives or girlfriends in between divided us. 
I finally had a reason to break off a relationship with a couple with whom we had nothing in common. I worked with the guy in the same building for 2 out of 20 years of association - before they had kids. The daughter seemed to turn out OK while the younger son made demands on his mother like asking her to leave her guests (us included) to pick up a sub sandwich and take it to him at a friend's house. She complied and returned after almost an hour. Less than an hour after that, the son called her to pick him up and take him home. She complied. In our company on another occasion, the 17 year old son said "Fuck you Mom!" in front of us, other guests and his father. I was offended and told the little shit not to speak to my friend (his mother) that way. The father said or did nothing and later told me "I don't want to be the bad guy." If I had said that to my mother in the presence of my father, I'm certain to have gotten the back of his hand on my mouth, and I would've deserved it. But I would've never even thought of saying that to my mom.
These doting, helicopter parents have unhealthy agendas. The father wants his son to grow up and be his friend. The mother told us the rather absurd statement "The only reason I had children is to become a grandmother." The mother is the only clueless person around her obviously Gay son (the father overheard conversations with a sleep-over buddy about 'things' they had done together and called me in some homophobic panic). The mom asks the son while they're watching TV together, "Hey, _______, which of these girls do you find attractive?" His answer, "The short-haired one Mom." Clueless, yet hovering, acquiescing to a fault, and demonstrating piss-poor parenting IMO.
I noticed that the kids who attended Catholic school until the 6th grade came to the public junior high school as the most physically aggressive males and some of the most promiscuous females in reaction to their years of guilt-laying nuns and general suppression. My parents were quite liberal and I had lots of freedom from a young age at a time and place that was fairly idyllic. My regret is that my father, while being a constant presence in the home and a good provider, lost interest in any real father-son relationship. He provided me with toys and later science equipment, but he neither played with his son[s] or showed an active interest in our activities. He did teach me how to use tools, but was soon quite distant emotionally, in competition with my mother's emotional neediness towards her sons and me in particular. I think much of my brother's hostility towards me might be because of our mother's favoritism of me. At the end of her life, my brother coerced my parents to deed their condo over to him if he assumed their mortgage payments. Possibly my mother assuaged her guilt for favoring me, her first born, by this concession, and my brother simultaneously had the opportunity to stick it to me by not sharing the sale money of the condo, sans his mortgage payments. In any event, I got screwed out of my inheritance by my brother who at the time was making a six-figure salary compared to my $43K gross/year.
So, there were my liberal parents who allowed us a lot of independence despite our mother's emotional neediness due to a gruff, non-affectionate husband. My brother polished up whatever feelings of entitlement he had as a compensatory complex by going to law school where lawyers are taught to be arrogant. I turned out all too acquiescing and self-effacing at times when assertiveness has been called for. I have improved along this line with age, however my wife often scolds me for being too nice with obnoxious people or clients who over-stay their sessions. I try to help others while still helping myself (which means I'm no longer co-dependent) and my brother helps himself to other people's money because HE is more important than other people in his own eyes. Both from the same parents/parenting, but different psychological dynamics between each of us and our parents, and then between us. Not a scientific study, just some anecdotal material for you.
Edited by MarkostheGnostic (09/02/16 02:15 PM)
|
Crumist
Stranger


Registered: 11/02/13
Posts: 781
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
|
|
I was worried my question was offensive, but had a sneaking suspicion you were mature enough to avoid resenting the question or myself. Thank you.
Your anecdotes are interesting as well, sorry about your brother and father. May we all face less pressure in the future regarding whether or not we have children (I doubt it, people can't ever keep their noses out of others' business)
-------------------- 'I am all for resources being allocated to the widowed single mother of 3, lost husband over seas fighting for our country. I am for vets getting mental health access and resources following war. I am not for free money cause a woman can't close her legs or some chump with low testosterone no going to work cause "i'm sad."' -finalexplosion Nice knowin ya'll! https://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Number/23904704/vc/1#23904704
|
MarkostheGnostic
Elder



Registered: 12/09/99
Posts: 14,279
Loc: South Florida
Last seen: 3 years, 3 days
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: Crumist]
#23605695 - 09/02/16 06:33 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah, sure, maturity I have at this point. I could be insulted even as a child and not become angry, which was taken as a sign of weakness. I even got hit a couple of times in the face for refusing to let some kid I didn't know try on my Beatle-boots. I was stunned more than hurt, embarrassed more than angry, and I didn't retaliate. My late father once told me that when ordered to my room for a spanking as a young child I said "You can hit me all you want but I won't cry." I asked if I got the spanking anyway and he said "No, what would've been the point." Even when my father publicly beat the shit out of me at age 7 at Arlington National Cemetery for saying something mean to my 3 year old brother, I refused to shed a tear, while my whole body hummed and throbbed from the beating. Today I don't go about insulting people out of arrogance or meanness, but there are always people who don't like me. That's their issues, not mine. At age 63, I truly don't give a shit what most people think of me. My motives are mostly pure so I have very little self-doubt. Self-doubt is what makes miscreants hurt and angry when they're insulted.
-------------------- γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself
|
Kickle
Wanderer


Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 17,856
Last seen: 42 minutes, 47 seconds
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: Alonzo]
#23605727 - 09/02/16 06:41 PM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Alonzo said: It is immoral to "doom" anyone to anything, usually. Tbh I'd be willing to join or even form a group to bring awareness to this issue. Maybe doing so would help fight overpopulation, reduce the welfare pop, encourage adoption or whatever.
IME it's better to take a more middling stance with others if your goal is to raise awareness. Extreme stances may garner quicker attention but do not lead to much consideration IMO. Rather it tends to lead to opposing forces.
When discussing this topic with co-workers I often say that I do not know the outcome of creating a life, and in the face of that unknowing I choose inaction.
That usually gives them a bit of pause to reflect on why they desire to or already have chosen to act. Or at least an opening for that discussion. Which IMO is much more meaningful than condemning another's choices.
Some may believe that their child will go to heaven when it dies and so they are actually providing something quite miraculous. Or I have heard from a Buddhist that without human birth there would be no chance for lower life-forms to move into higher life-forms. Or some contemplate pinning the unknowing into an assumption of "better" i.e. what if, in inaction, one prevents that child who goes on to cure cancer? What if inaction results in consequence rather than benefit?
I just answer that it could, I don't know the outcome either way and because I don't know I choose inaction. I'm not assuming it's the better choice and I'm not assuming that it's the wrong choice. It's just how I've approached not knowing.
There's so many reasons people actually do contemplate, it's interesting. And at the end of the day they *could* be right. Do I think they are? Not really. But someone is having a kid who is going on to do something pretty incredible out there. And if they took my approach it wouldn't happen. So there's something there. But there's a lot on the other side of the coin also, maybe even more depending what you look at. In the end I don't think there is any truth that I can lord above another here. It's always a big unknown IMO. As long as they are actually pondering why they are bringing another life in to die, I'm happier than individuals shitting out a kid just 'Cause.
-------------------- Why shouldn't the truth be stranger than fiction? Fiction, after all, has to make sense. -- Mark Twain
|
demiu5
humans, lol


Registered: 08/18/05
Posts: 43,948
Loc: the popcorn stadium
|
|
Quote:
DividedQuantum said:
Time just to sit back and enjoy the crisis.
this is about where i'm at right now.
i've been anti-children for a decade or longer. going on 30 and still have no desire to bring children into this situation, let alone raise them as i see proper to affect change in the world. i generally refuse uphill battles, and this is on the steepest incline yet.
party on, wayne!
-------------------- channel your inner Larry David
|
DividedQuantum
Outer Head


Registered: 12/06/13
Posts: 9,819
|
Re: Antinatalism (Procreation is Bad) [Re: demiu5]
#23607419 - 09/03/16 10:00 AM (7 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Party on, Garth!
-------------------- Vi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
|
|