this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2024
415 points (99.3% liked)

196

16092 readers
1869 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] 41 points 1 month ago (7 children)

Antinatalism isn't just a personal decision to not have kids, it's an ideological belief that having kids is morally wrong.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

This is an overgeneralisation which completely misses the nuance. Antinatalism does not postulate that it's morally wrong to procreate, only that it is morally wrong to bring another human consciousness into a soup of suffering, which... yeah, kinda'! I mean, is the world not presently a soup of suffering, with extra helpings on the way?

Personally, I doubt most people who subscribe to Antinatalism would do so if society weren't literally a hell hole right now.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 month ago (3 children)

if "a soup of suffering" means "life/the world" u just said "its not that its morally wrong to give birth, but that its morally wrong to give birth"? :p

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

The world as it is now, yes. But this is far from the only option, thus the world is not an inevitable soup of suffering. So, no.

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

Unless you're both an antinatalist and a philosophical pessimist and believe that the world will always be that soup. But yeah, that's not the case for all antinatalists. A friend of mine calls himself a "temporary antinatalist".

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

True. I guess the distinction, though semantically redundant, seems to be contextually necessary nowadays...

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)