Consciousness is required to give consent, requiring consent to be born is a paradox.
This is a philosophical debate of which i see only 2 possible outcomes.
Life itself is a fundamental bad and negative the only ethical thing to do is fully halt the circle of reproduction to minimize all harm
Life itself is a fundamental good and positive, we must nurture and protect it to minimize harm against it. Prioritizing well being and personal happinesses while finding a “cure” for intolerance, hate and greed.
Forcing birth upon someone is fundamentally wrong, and the only ethical thing to do is halt the cycle of reproduction to prevent further harm. We should also strive to minimize further harm to those already alive by prioritizing well-being and personal happiness, while searching for a “cure” for intolerance, hate, and greed.
Can you give some context on how that would look like in practice that is not akin to everybody suicide? If we stop the cycle of reproduction then humanity will go extinct in about a century (not considering Longevity escape velocity which would significantly alter the subject context)
Trying to create a better world and to find cures for harm is a difficult challenge, i am willing to sacrifice some of my own life (time, body and energy) for the common good knowing that future generations will be better off. But doing so knowing that in a century none of that work will matter at all would be detrimental to my ability to find meaning and therefore wellbeing in my life. Besides that, knowing that we have collectively chosen extinction rather then trying to archive the vast untapped potential our conscious minds still hold to grow would bring me great pain and sadness.
There is also the matter with what are we going to do with all other species on our planet? Do we respect their ability reproduce because they have no conscious concept of consent or we will we nuke the entire planet in the hope that their is no and never will be any other life out there?
Also a different question with a more spiritual angle: How can you be certain that there was nothing within you that existed before conception which did consent to being born as a human being in a random family. If we halt reproduction then we are forcing non existence on potential consciousness. In absolutes you can chose to end your life when you have it but you cannot give life to yourself when you don’t have it.
It’s not eugenics to be sad for 3 new autistic kids being brought into this world to suffer and die in the catasrophic climate collapse we’re so dead set on, it’s fucking empathy.
You don’t know if said persons are gonna have a bad life, you just don’t know.
Autism can be bat for some, maybe more than few, but is not for everybody, Humanity always has faced existencial crisis, we will fix climate change on way or another.
People are born neurodivergent but they are not born suicidal, the reason suicide is the leading cause of death is because we are a minority that is not well understood by the dominant majority, that is where almost all the hearth comes from.
Schizofrenia is also understood as a form neurodivergency and has quite some overlap with autosm. Most people know it as a horrible, scary mental illness but this is only the case in modern societies. Where in a big city people experience hallucinations of yelling, monsters and many intens negative emotions in natural communities they experience quite the opposite, visions of ancestors, angels, positive emotions and artistic beauty in things.
Instead of conceding that ‘life is pain, so we should not live,’ we should advocate that ‘society is inflicting pain, and we must reform it to prevent such suffering.’”
deleted by creator
“Your worldview differs from mine so therefore you must be sad and miserable”
Sure, bud
you think someone wronged you by allowing you to be alive.
A nonconsensual act is not “allowing”, it is forcing
parents can choose for their kids.
Consciousness is required to give consent, requiring consent to be born is a paradox.
This is a philosophical debate of which i see only 2 possible outcomes.
Life itself is a fundamental bad and negative the only ethical thing to do is fully halt the circle of reproduction to minimize all harm
Life itself is a fundamental good and positive, we must nurture and protect it to minimize harm against it. Prioritizing well being and personal happinesses while finding a “cure” for intolerance, hate and greed.
Alternative:
Can you give some context on how that would look like in practice that is not akin to everybody suicide? If we stop the cycle of reproduction then humanity will go extinct in about a century (not considering Longevity escape velocity which would significantly alter the subject context)
Trying to create a better world and to find cures for harm is a difficult challenge, i am willing to sacrifice some of my own life (time, body and energy) for the common good knowing that future generations will be better off. But doing so knowing that in a century none of that work will matter at all would be detrimental to my ability to find meaning and therefore wellbeing in my life. Besides that, knowing that we have collectively chosen extinction rather then trying to archive the vast untapped potential our conscious minds still hold to grow would bring me great pain and sadness.
There is also the matter with what are we going to do with all other species on our planet? Do we respect their ability reproduce because they have no conscious concept of consent or we will we nuke the entire planet in the hope that their is no and never will be any other life out there?
Also a different question with a more spiritual angle: How can you be certain that there was nothing within you that existed before conception which did consent to being born as a human being in a random family. If we halt reproduction then we are forcing non existence on potential consciousness. In absolutes you can chose to end your life when you have it but you cannot give life to yourself when you don’t have it.
Parents can choose over their kids until adulthood, for example to have or not a medical treatment or how they should be educated.
Parents should choose if they make a kid or not as well.
Nope. By forcing life upon them, you are by extension forcing upon them every bit of suffering they will endure. Not okay.
and every bit of more probable happiness, so by the same logic it would be a strict moral duty to bring as many life as possible into the world.
Ffs having autism sucks, suicide is one of the leading causes of death for us, and on average we die around 50.
It’s not eugenics to be sad for 3 new autistic kids being brought into this world to suffer and die in the catasrophic climate collapse we’re so dead set on, it’s fucking empathy.
You don’t know if said persons are gonna have a bad life, you just don’t know.
Autism can be bat for some, maybe more than few, but is not for everybody, Humanity always has faced existencial crisis, we will fix climate change on way or another.
People are born neurodivergent but they are not born suicidal, the reason suicide is the leading cause of death is because we are a minority that is not well understood by the dominant majority, that is where almost all the hearth comes from.
Schizofrenia is also understood as a form neurodivergency and has quite some overlap with autosm. Most people know it as a horrible, scary mental illness but this is only the case in modern societies. Where in a big city people experience hallucinations of yelling, monsters and many intens negative emotions in natural communities they experience quite the opposite, visions of ancestors, angels, positive emotions and artistic beauty in things.
Instead of conceding that ‘life is pain, so we should not live,’ we should advocate that ‘society is inflicting pain, and we must reform it to prevent such suffering.’”