this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2024
415 points (99.1% liked)

196

16552 readers
2041 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 54 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Antinatalism is reactionary and incorrect.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Need dragon slayers in the time dragons.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Suffering is inherent to the human condition. Is it okay to undertake actions that cause people suffering?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

What makes something okay? Who decides what is okay and what is not okay?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm taking an utilitarian approach. Suffering should be avoided, and happiness maximized. Bringing another being into existence guarantees suffering, with a chance of creating happiness. That is not a gamble you should take on behalf of another being.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

Is the potential (or guarantee) for suffering greater than the potential for joy? You also have to account for the joy of the person and the joy they create. I believe the potential for expected joy exceeds the guarantee of suffering.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

What previous status quo are antinatalists trying to return to? "Reactionary" is just the left wing equivalent of "woke".

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

I suppose the previous status quo that anti-natalists want to return to is before the evolution of intelligent life. Word is still out on whether it's immoral for single-celled organisms to reproduce.