Is Antinatalism a Viable Philosophy for the Future?

  • Thread starter Thread starter houlahound
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers around the philosophy of antinatalism, which posits that procreation is morally questionable due to the inherent suffering and dangers of life. Julio Cabrera's concept of negative ethics is highlighted, arguing that bringing a person into existence without their consent subjects them to pain and suffering. Participants debate the validity of antinatalism, with some asserting that pain is a necessary aspect of survival and growth, while others challenge the idea of consent related to birth. The conversation also touches on the implications of population control, the nature of happiness in children, and the moral obligations surrounding procreation. There is a tension between valuing life and recognizing the suffering it entails, leading to a broader discussion about the responsibilities of individuals in society regarding reproduction. Ultimately, the dialogue reflects diverse perspectives on existence, morality, and the consequences of human actions.
  • #31
Antinatalists are not forcing anyone to do anything.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
houlahound said:
OK what would be good or bad about less people breeding??

In underpopulated areas it would be bad. In over populated areas it would be good.
 
  • #33
houlahound said:
You guys with pain is good for you theory are masochists...I'm not going to no party at your place.

Maybe you should get schools to teach mandatory courses in self harm to build character.

Do you refuse pain medication in order to become a better human, I doubt it.

"pain is beneficial for survival" ## \neq ## "I like pain"
 
  • #34
Cabrera argues that we lack the consent of this person when we act on his behalf through procreation, and that we should respect the idea that someone may prefer never to be born, away from pain and death. Gerald Harrison and Julia Tanner also write about lack of consent, arguing that we have no moral right to significantly affect others without their consent.
This is silly. These people (Cabrera, Harrison, and Tanner) have waaaaay too much time on their hands.

houlahound said:
Well I didn't breed but there was no reason moral or otherwise to it. I eventually got depressed by peer pressure that you need to have children because, because. Nobody could give anything else but lame reasons.
Have you concluded that you have absolutely no good qualities that you would enjoy seeing in your progeny?
houlahound said:
I was horrified to find out how little reason so many folks put into creating life. I swear some people put more effort into choosing kitchen appliances.
Unfortunately, this is true for many people, but it certainly is not true for all.
houlahound said:
I accidently stumbled across antinatalism decades later and used it as a response and claim some moral ground.
To be honest I do feel superior at times for not breeding, I don't know why but I definitely feel one up for it. I know childish right.
Yes, and naive, IMO.

There was a religious sect here in the U.S. in the 19th Century -- the Shakers. They believed in celibacy. To no one's surprise, they died out. The only things they left behind was their style of furniture and a town in Ohio, Shaker Heights.
 
  • #35
houlahound said:
You guys with pain is good for you theory are masochists...I'm not going to no party at your place.
Pain and its counterpart, pleasure, are both required. Without pain, we couldn't appreciate the things that bring pleasure.

In any case, both of these are relative. I enjoy going for long backpack trips (50 miles+) in very precipitous country that other people would find extremely painful, and is sometimes painful to me. Try walking 15 miles downhill along a ridge with a nickel-sized blister on the ball of your foot. Do I enjoy this pain? Not at all, but the pleasure it gives me to be in such beautiful country greatly outweighs the minor discomfort I get once in a while, when I'm not paying close enough attention to my feet.
houlahound said:
Maybe you should get schools to teach mandatory courses in self harm to build character.
If you're talking about self-mutlilation where people cut themselves for no good reason, then I agree. On the other hand, there's an outfit here in the U.S. called Outward Bound, where lots of kids with no self-esteem and no abilities to deal with nature go through pretty rigourous treks. Most of them are quite surprised to find how much they enjoy it, despite the obvious hardships they face along the way. Not to mention, the feeling of accomplishment they achieve at being able to do something they wouldn't have thought possible.
houlahound said:
Do you refuse pain medication in order to become a better human, I doubt it.
There are a lot of people who are addicted to heroin and other opioids who aren't able to refuse pain medication. Being able to just grit your teeth and get on with it can sometimes be a good thing.

houlahound said:
I find getting the most out of people involves removing all impediments and barriers for them, not hitting their thumb with a hammer.
There's a huge difference between hitting their thumb with a hammer and removing all impediments. People grow when they are faced with hurdles. Without them, they stagnate.
 
  • #36
houlahound said:
Maybe you should get schools to teach mandatory courses in self harm to build character.

You realize you are saying this to a group of people who majored in math and physics? :-p:-p
 
  • #37
I'm curious to know how one would consent or deny consent to be born. What/where are you before you are born?
 
  • #38
Before you were born, you were a fetus.
My son was born a month early, so a late term unborn cold be functional in a survival sense.
Communication with the new born is limited however.
You might be getting smiles, eye looks, or something like that from them,
but they would not understand complex concepts like "Do you want to be not born?"
 
  • #39
Right. No one has a choice whether or not they want to be born. That decision is up to the parents. So, if you wants kids you can either conceive or adopt. If you don't, put a sock on it. Those are my thoughts on antinatalism. Also that it's a rather pointless discussion. Since none of us choose to be born, go do some good in the world and make it a better place to live.
 
  • Like
Likes OmCheeto
  • #40
Tsu said:
Also that it's a rather pointless discussion. Since none of us choose to be born, go do some good in the world and make it a better place to live.
And that's a good place to end this thread.
 
  • Like
Likes phinds, OmCheeto and Tsu

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 137 ·
5
Replies
137
Views
28K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
1K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
Replies
84
Views
20K