pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 9 replies \ @hybridbits OP 20h \ parent \ on: Is choosing not to have kids the most ethical act today? AskSN
But what about those struggling with suicidal thoughts? Don’t they often wish they didn’t exist? Over 700k people die by suicide every year around the globe. What about people in extreme financial conditions, or those suffering from chronic diseases, disabilities, or unrelenting pain? For many, the desire to escape their circumstances can make life feel unbearable. The argument for antinatalism isn't about denying the potential for happiness or prosperity, but recognizing the real and devastating suffering that can accompany existence.
While it's true that more people can contribute to economic growth, this doesn't seem enough to justify bringing more suffering into the world.
What you're saying just doesn't support the antinatalist position. Again, the vast majority of people are glad they exist. That means the expected value of creating a new person is that it will be a person who's glad to be alive. Choosing not to have kids is depriving someone of life they would have valued.
Further, even people who go through suicidal periods are not suicidal all the time. So, even the population you're pointing to spend large portions of their lives preferring to be alive.
To choose non-life for someone who would prefer life, because you don't like that they might experience suffering is extremely disrespectful. People can persevere through a lot and don't wish they had died during their periods of hardship.
reply
Interesting points. But I can't shake the feeling that:
Choosing not to have kids is depriving someone of life they would have valued
Can be valid for the other side as well. The antinatalist argument believes that there is more suffering than pleasure/non-suffering. ‘Choosing TO have kids is condemning someone to a life they would probably hate.’ And (just guessing) that’s probably true, especially if you’re born in a shitty country like India, Libya, or in a favela in the northeast of Brazil. I dunno, dude. I need to read more and live more to get to a good answer.
reply
Yes, both can be true, but why err on the side of the (far) less likely outcome?
there is more suffering than pleasure/non-suffering
In what way can this claim possibly be evaluated? Revealed preference (almost everyone continues to choose living) is the only evidence we have and it's extremely against your assertion.
Even people born into situations that you deem undesirable generally prefer to be alive. Who are you to decide for people that their lives aren't worth living? This seems unbelievably arrogant and entitled.
reply
reply
That's really the final nail in the argument.