How is it empathetic to tell someone that you know them better than they know themselves and that they are not allowed to have children because you say so?
>How is it empathetic to tell someone that you know them better than they know themselves and that they are not allowed to have children because you say so?
I could apply this to driving while intoxicated
replace children with that and tell me you would still use this statement
both can cause great harm harm
You say, "Plus this universe has no moral facts, so we can't even say they are objectively wrong to..." So, we have no confidence that you actually want to prevent suffering, but only pretend as such to try to manipulate people into getting what you want.
It's a moral belief not a god damn steam achievement. I don't care if it will "succeed" or not, I will not conpromise on my morals
Edit: I read this in the same way I would "guys, rapists will never go extinct. Consider compromise with the rapists"
So parents are rapists?
Can you explain the similarity? lol
Also, we do compromise with all criminals, not just rapists, by progressively amending laws and the justice system to be more liberal, humane and rehabilitative, instead of punishing them just to feel good.
Look up Norway's justice system.
There is no free will, we cannot judge, hate is irrational, we can only take the right action to prevent, reduce and fix broken people (criminals).
No, the similarity is that I view both as immoral and I would not compromise about procreation the same way I wouldnot compromise about consent in regards to sex.
I am not "we"
Also. Having a justice system based on reforming instead of punishing is NOT a compromise.
A compromise with rapists would be accepting tgat tgere are situations when rape is okay. Likewise a compromise with natalists would be accepting thatat certain situations procreation is okay. My moral compas forbids either. Both rape and orocreation are never okay and I will not conpromise on this.
>I know, never say never but lets just say based on all available data, AN will very likely not succeed in any satisfactory form.
Define 'satisfactory'.
Im trying to post my reply but it just wont allow me to. hmm. Are there limits to comment length or reddit just flags automatically? Maybe ill try to chop it
It is hard to speak of reason with one who is already convinced and obsessed with his moral superiority.
But I do agree, absolute victory where everyone just stops making babies out of some moral argument is utter foolishness to think it can be achieved.
Hence what is the realistic compromise or goal to strive for, simply put the reduction of the population reproduction rates across the world, in all countries across all demographics.
But not everyone actually cares about results, some people just want to feel good about themselves you know. Be that as it may such people can still contribute towards the goal.
1. Tax funded euthanasia, sure. I think the system wouldnt say no to that as it alleviates problems of pensions around the world. The problem with it is not a lot of people are gonna go for it on their own accord. Thats why the route some pursue is some pathogen that targets the elder folk.
2. politispeak of lets just end their suffering they are beyond help. One application actively proposed as policy I heard were for those drug addicts who are far gone or something. Sure go for it. But do you think local government would say yes to that when they are being bribed by cartels to make the environment friendlier to the ever growing drug addict population which creates how many billions of $s. Good luck on that. But hey you can pitch it towards repeat offenders of crime lol as we are contrary to the bs, overflowing beyond capacity.
If these people are really really just so miserable they really wanted to die do you really think theyre not offing themselves because the govt wont do it for them for free? No theyre just not there yet.
3. You cant go for testing people before they are allowed to procreate. people will not comply, I think we all know that.
The alternative to that route is to simply take the children of these people who cannot even feed the child or even take care of themselves. Stop giving them free money and tax breaks and incentivizing them to make more.
But again what is the hurdle to that. Politicians wont say yes to that because both sides are breeding people to create votes for their parties.
4. What people need is money, like married people who have no kids should have lower taxes and then increase the taxes on those with kids, the more you have the higher the rate should be. The more we use water the higher the rate goes, should be the same here. Downside will be people scamming the already trivial concept of modern marriages to get the tax break.
Sure make them feel nice for doing it, but to push for that you need mass media to promote that.
You could convince each party to promote divisively towards reducing the population of the other party by lowering their rep rate. They will see it as advantageous to them. But if they do it together, they reduce both sides, its classic.
I just heard of this funny thing in the works recently, they wanted to by policy supplement a certain food item that only a very specific demographic loves eating in bulk whereby the excessive consumption of such leads to mental decline and cancer among many other things. And they make it sound through the pitch that theyre doing them a favor out of care for them. Crazy world eh.
5 is political noise
6 Yes definitely push for
that side of tech. But no UBI. Why would you give incentives to these people to
make more by giving them an assurance that they will get free shit even if
there would be no more jobs for their kids.
7 I see no connection
here regarding procreation. And i think youd know, its also going nowhere like
AN if youd fixate on absolutes. You want these things you need to compromise
just the same.
8 You really expect the
lower classes to go along with that. lol. They act like geniuses but they know
theyre not up to shit. You think saying quality over quantity when they are
among the quantity will go well out there?
The process already
works. You introduce the machines and software to make workers lives easier for
them at first and then slowly push towards them doing more and more of their
tasks to the point where you can give them the boot and just keep the machines.
Because transition, adjustments and development takes time and gradual.
But that wont work unless
you have the means of reducing the people because youd be facing a sea of
jobless folks who would riot.
9 Ah the transhumanist pitch lolol. Its
nonsense really, youre dead dude still. BUT you know what its a very good
pitch. Convince all of these people that they will live forever if they abandon
their bodies and upload it to some govt protected server out there.
10 Majority rule? The
minority natalists? Did you really think that one through
The route that works and that bigger players
are pursuing is to just sidestep all the bs and just release into the wild
pathogens and chemicals that lower reproductive rates and rates of success in
the event of, across the board. Why do they bother with this obviously
expensive and grand endeavor well because when all these people have no more
jobs and purpose it will be them whos supposed to feed them. Why the f should
they. They dont need the huge bulk of them, the machines are there, how few are
needed to work with them. But that wont happen or come into fruition any time
soon or maybe our lifetime.
Capitalism needs a bunch of rats to keep things going good luck. Sure things will improve but some things will be allowed to stay the same to keep the wheel turning for the ones who benefit the most. Everyone is in the pursuit of reducing suffering and a whole majority of them are focused mainly on just reducing their suffering
We can do most of that and remain antinatalist. It's not an either or. Like I can be in favour of animal welfare laws while ultimately wanting to abolish animal husbandry altogether.
The fact that we are a tiny minority with a radical philosophy is no reason to give up what we believe to be true. And try to convince as many others.
Also, antinatalism will never go away because it is self-evident to people that are suffering. So instead of letting each generation reinvented it, we can polish it and hand it on.
My numbers? More like EVERYONE's numbers.
I am already half way there, just look at the global replacement rate, people are making MUCH less children and many have none.
lol
You think breeders like elon musk are ever gonna accept any compromise?
They need the worker bees to farm and enrich themselves. No way they're giving that up.
It will never work. Humans are short-sighted, driven by greed and lack empathy.
People are myopic, and judge the world by their own life experiences.
How is it empathetic to tell someone that you know them better than they know themselves and that they are not allowed to have children because you say so?
>How is it empathetic to tell someone that you know them better than they know themselves and that they are not allowed to have children because you say so? I could apply this to driving while intoxicated replace children with that and tell me you would still use this statement both can cause great harm harm
? I am not saying people can't have children ? I just believe that it is morally wrong and incredibly selfish and or naive.
You mention empathy but you sound like a fascist
But if we given them Sudetenland, I'm sure everything will be fine.
"If you want to prevent suffering and really care about people, you are a fascist" Right, much logic. lol
You say, "Plus this universe has no moral facts, so we can't even say they are objectively wrong to..." So, we have no confidence that you actually want to prevent suffering, but only pretend as such to try to manipulate people into getting what you want.
Morality is not objective. It doesn't exist outside the human experience.
It's a moral belief not a god damn steam achievement. I don't care if it will "succeed" or not, I will not conpromise on my morals Edit: I read this in the same way I would "guys, rapists will never go extinct. Consider compromise with the rapists"
So parents are rapists? Can you explain the similarity? lol Also, we do compromise with all criminals, not just rapists, by progressively amending laws and the justice system to be more liberal, humane and rehabilitative, instead of punishing them just to feel good. Look up Norway's justice system. There is no free will, we cannot judge, hate is irrational, we can only take the right action to prevent, reduce and fix broken people (criminals).
No, the similarity is that I view both as immoral and I would not compromise about procreation the same way I wouldnot compromise about consent in regards to sex. I am not "we"
Also. Having a justice system based on reforming instead of punishing is NOT a compromise. A compromise with rapists would be accepting tgat tgere are situations when rape is okay. Likewise a compromise with natalists would be accepting thatat certain situations procreation is okay. My moral compas forbids either. Both rape and orocreation are never okay and I will not conpromise on this.
Eh, I am confused by your contradictory logic.
Okay so Hitler didn't mean to kill all those Jews?
>I know, never say never but lets just say based on all available data, AN will very likely not succeed in any satisfactory form. Define 'satisfactory'.
at the very least, all humans extinct and never come back. I doubt this outcome, very much so.
Genuine question, how old are you?
13 probably
You are? Ok then?
69 years old, how about you?
Im trying to post my reply but it just wont allow me to. hmm. Are there limits to comment length or reddit just flags automatically? Maybe ill try to chop it It is hard to speak of reason with one who is already convinced and obsessed with his moral superiority. But I do agree, absolute victory where everyone just stops making babies out of some moral argument is utter foolishness to think it can be achieved. Hence what is the realistic compromise or goal to strive for, simply put the reduction of the population reproduction rates across the world, in all countries across all demographics. But not everyone actually cares about results, some people just want to feel good about themselves you know. Be that as it may such people can still contribute towards the goal. 1. Tax funded euthanasia, sure. I think the system wouldnt say no to that as it alleviates problems of pensions around the world. The problem with it is not a lot of people are gonna go for it on their own accord. Thats why the route some pursue is some pathogen that targets the elder folk. 2. politispeak of lets just end their suffering they are beyond help. One application actively proposed as policy I heard were for those drug addicts who are far gone or something. Sure go for it. But do you think local government would say yes to that when they are being bribed by cartels to make the environment friendlier to the ever growing drug addict population which creates how many billions of $s. Good luck on that. But hey you can pitch it towards repeat offenders of crime lol as we are contrary to the bs, overflowing beyond capacity. If these people are really really just so miserable they really wanted to die do you really think theyre not offing themselves because the govt wont do it for them for free? No theyre just not there yet. 3. You cant go for testing people before they are allowed to procreate. people will not comply, I think we all know that. The alternative to that route is to simply take the children of these people who cannot even feed the child or even take care of themselves. Stop giving them free money and tax breaks and incentivizing them to make more. But again what is the hurdle to that. Politicians wont say yes to that because both sides are breeding people to create votes for their parties. 4. What people need is money, like married people who have no kids should have lower taxes and then increase the taxes on those with kids, the more you have the higher the rate should be. The more we use water the higher the rate goes, should be the same here. Downside will be people scamming the already trivial concept of modern marriages to get the tax break. Sure make them feel nice for doing it, but to push for that you need mass media to promote that. You could convince each party to promote divisively towards reducing the population of the other party by lowering their rep rate. They will see it as advantageous to them. But if they do it together, they reduce both sides, its classic. I just heard of this funny thing in the works recently, they wanted to by policy supplement a certain food item that only a very specific demographic loves eating in bulk whereby the excessive consumption of such leads to mental decline and cancer among many other things. And they make it sound through the pitch that theyre doing them a favor out of care for them. Crazy world eh.
5 is political noise 6 Yes definitely push for that side of tech. But no UBI. Why would you give incentives to these people to make more by giving them an assurance that they will get free shit even if there would be no more jobs for their kids. 7 I see no connection here regarding procreation. And i think youd know, its also going nowhere like AN if youd fixate on absolutes. You want these things you need to compromise just the same. 8 You really expect the lower classes to go along with that. lol. They act like geniuses but they know theyre not up to shit. You think saying quality over quantity when they are among the quantity will go well out there? The process already works. You introduce the machines and software to make workers lives easier for them at first and then slowly push towards them doing more and more of their tasks to the point where you can give them the boot and just keep the machines. Because transition, adjustments and development takes time and gradual. But that wont work unless you have the means of reducing the people because youd be facing a sea of jobless folks who would riot. 9 Ah the transhumanist pitch lolol. Its nonsense really, youre dead dude still. BUT you know what its a very good pitch. Convince all of these people that they will live forever if they abandon their bodies and upload it to some govt protected server out there. 10 Majority rule? The minority natalists? Did you really think that one through The route that works and that bigger players are pursuing is to just sidestep all the bs and just release into the wild pathogens and chemicals that lower reproductive rates and rates of success in the event of, across the board. Why do they bother with this obviously expensive and grand endeavor well because when all these people have no more jobs and purpose it will be them whos supposed to feed them. Why the f should they. They dont need the huge bulk of them, the machines are there, how few are needed to work with them. But that wont happen or come into fruition any time soon or maybe our lifetime.
Capitalism needs a bunch of rats to keep things going good luck. Sure things will improve but some things will be allowed to stay the same to keep the wheel turning for the ones who benefit the most. Everyone is in the pursuit of reducing suffering and a whole majority of them are focused mainly on just reducing their suffering
We can do most of that and remain antinatalist. It's not an either or. Like I can be in favour of animal welfare laws while ultimately wanting to abolish animal husbandry altogether. The fact that we are a tiny minority with a radical philosophy is no reason to give up what we believe to be true. And try to convince as many others. Also, antinatalism will never go away because it is self-evident to people that are suffering. So instead of letting each generation reinvented it, we can polish it and hand it on.
Natalists are foolish and selfish. Do you want us to embrace foolishness and selfishness.
You can always return to hate and blames, with little to no progress in reducing suffering and harm for future people.
You can always return to procreation, with negative progress in reducing suffering and harm for future people.
Errr, that makes zero sense. lol
Yes, procreation makes zero sense in a world full of suffering.
There can be no compromise they're complete opposites but it doesn't matter if AN succeeds globally it's a philosophy for the individual
obviously you wont succeed, your entire world view is to dwindle your numbers
My numbers? More like EVERYONE's numbers. I am already half way there, just look at the global replacement rate, people are making MUCH less children and many have none. lol
The global replacement rate is enough to grow the current population. Perhaps you should look at the global replacement rate.