Philosophy Now Forum

Dalek Prime wrote:Thank you Blaggard and Spheres for the welcome.

No worries, Blaggard. No imperialist tendencies here. Thank you also for the confirmation of the link issue.

Spheres, I loved your critique. Thank you. I'm certain you do what you can for your kids. That's all any parent can do. 

I do see one thing differently though. It is the concept of "life as a gift". I feel life to be an imposition, not a gift. It's actually core to my antinatalism, and it centers on the inability to acquire and render consent for this thing we call life. And that which is not freely consented to, is an imposition.

Cheers all.

Do you think that possibly, whether it's a gift or an imposition, depends largely upon ones particular set of experiences, i.e., whether one was born with a silver spoon or no spoon, or maybe a hopeful positive sense of possibility, or the opposite; (brain chemistry)? You know, a healthy/unhealthy dose of either optimism or pessimism.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Do you think that possibly, whether it's a gift or an imposition, depends largely upon ones particular set of experiences, i.e., whether one was born with a silver spoon or no spoon, or maybe a hopeful positive sense of possibility, or the opposite; (brain chemistry)? You know, a healthy/unhealthy dose of either optimism or pessimism.

Can we agree that something imposed is something forced? Can we also agree that something forced, is still forced, whether we view it optimistically or pessimistically? Can we therefore agree that birth (life) is forced (imposed), independent of the viewpoint, or malady of the brain?

So no, I don't think that.

Dalek Prime wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Do you think that possibly, whether it's a gift or an imposition, depends largely upon ones particular set of experiences, i.e., whether one was born with a silver spoon or no spoon, or maybe a hopeful positive sense of possibility, or the opposite; (brain chemistry)? You know, a healthy/unhealthy dose of either optimism or pessimism.

Can we agree that something imposed is something forced? Can we also agree that something forced, is still forced, whether we view it optimistically or pessimistically? Can we therefore agree that birth (life) is forced (imposed), independent of the viewpoint, or malady of the brain?

So no, I don't think that.

Actually we can't, agree, that is!
Why?

Did you feel this way on day one?
If not, at what exact age did this line of thinking become apparent?

The concepts Forced, Imposed, and Gift, as to ones life, are learned, "programmed" much later in life.
They are either the result of bad or good juju!
The reason I say "gift," is because life is the only way you're going to have a "choice."
Just as much as you can say, that life is "forced," the opposite is also true, you are "forcing," no life.
Of course not as much as a male you're not, but surely as a woman you are.

Don't get me wrong, as I've told you, I absolutely hate what mankind has become! Who knows, maybe your child would rise up and crush the oppression, creating a planet of equilibrium, that is, if they ever have that choice of whether life is forced or a gift, right now you're making that decision for them as if you are a god of all life.

Hypothetical 1: I am the head of state. On your 18th birthday, you will fight a war for me. Complain all you want about it, I am going to put you in an environment where there is a good chance you will suffer, possibly die. I will feed, clothe, house and train you, as a member of my army. I will also discipline you when you do not follow orders. And if you survive your tour of duty (say 2 years) I will consider your service complete, and you are free to do as you will in the wider world with no further thought given to me, save recall in another time of war, and hope you do not hold this imposition against me.

Hypothetical 2: I am your parent. At conception (or birth if you prefer), you will live, based on my choice to procreate. Complain all you want about it, I am going to put you in an environment (the world) where there is a good chance you will suffer, and definitely die. I will feed, clothe, house, educate, and generally nurture you, as a member of my family. Of course, I will need to discipline you when you get out of hand. And when you come of age, if indeed you do, I will accept your majority, and you will be free to enter the wider world to do as you will. But if you do not keep in touch and respect me, I will consider you an ingrate. After all, I gave you this gift of life. Anyways, see you when you get back from the war... Damned imposition it is....

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
you are "forcing," no life.

On whom or what? Nothing? You're right. I am imposing on nothing and no one.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Of course not as much as a male you're not, but surely as a woman you are.

Half your genes say otherwise.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
The reason I say "gift," is because life is the only way you're going to have a "choice."

Nothing wouldn't miss getting a gift. Nothing doesn't care about choice. And why would you want to give nothing a gift, anyways?

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Don't get me wrong, as I've told you, I absolutely hate what mankind has become!

So, if you hate it, why do you think your child would think any different? Do you often give gifts of dubious value?

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Who knows, maybe your child would rise up and crush the oppression, creating a planet of equilibrium,

All other children thus far haven't done it. I doubt one more would do the trick. Besides, it is unethical to gamble another's life, which is what every parent does. And the end result is death for the child anyways. So it's not even a gamble. It's a losing proposition.

As well, it is unethical to have a child for another's utility. How is that a gift at all, being born to be used for another's purpose? I stated this before, and you agreed. Do you now disagree?

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
that is, if they ever have that choice of whether life is forced or a gift, right now you're making that decision for them as if you are a god of all life.

Again, who am I making this decision for? No one and nothing. If I, myself, never existed, the outcome would be the same as my present stance; nothing. You, on the other hand, have actualized a child through procreation. You've made the decision for someone and something. You've created life, on a whim. If anyone acts as if they are the god of life, it is the creator of that life. It also makes you the god of death, as life is the necessary condition preceding death.

Me? If you want to call me a god, then I'm the god of nothing. I am mercy. There is no pain or suffering in nothingness, so why create the conditions for it? There are also no wants or desires (which, incidentally, left unfulfilled, creates suffering) in nothingness. It is your projection as a living, desirous, conscious being, that something is better than nothing, and that you are giving [gifting] something to nothing, that never cared, or could care, a whit for what you are offering. I think you misunderstand what nothing truly is, and isn't.

Dalek Prime wrote:Hypothetical 1: I am the head of state. On your 18th birthday, you will fight a war for me. Complain all you want about it, I am going to put you in an environment where there is a good chance you will suffer, possibly die. I will feed, clothe, house and train you, as a member of my army. I will also discipline you when you do not follow orders. And if you survive your tour of duty (say 2 years) I will consider your service complete, and you are free to do as you will in the wider world with no further thought given to me, save recall in another time of war, and hope you do not hold this imposition against me.

Hypothetical 2: I am your parent. At conception (or birth if you prefer), you will live, based on my choice to procreate. Complain all you want about it, I am going to put you in an environment (the world) where there is a good chance you will suffer, and definitely die. I will feed, clothe, house, educate, and generally nurture you, as a member of my family. Of course, I will need to discipline you when you get out of hand. And when you come of age, if indeed you do, I will accept your majority, and you will be free to enter the wider world to do as you will. But if you do not keep in touch and respect me, I will consider you an ingrate. After all, I gave you this gift of life. Anyways, see you when you get back from the war... Damned imposition it is....

So you're in pain and things haven't gone your way. I knew that from the beginning. It's a dichotomy my friend. Without pain there would be no joy. To some, the pain is worth the joy. If you've never had any, then please, quickly now, go out and have some, you don't know what you're missing. It might just make your pain go away!

Dalek Prime wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
you are "forcing," no life.

On whom or what? Nothing? You're right. I am imposing on nothing and no one.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Of course not as much as a male you're not, but surely as a woman you are.

Half your genes say otherwise.

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
The reason I say "gift," is because life is the only way you're going to have a "choice."

Nothing wouldn't miss getting a gift. Nothing doesn't care about choice. And why would you want to give nothing a gift, anyways?

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Don't get me wrong, as I've told you, I absolutely hate what mankind has become!

So, if you hate it, why do you think your child would think any different? Do you often give gifts of dubious value?

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
Who knows, maybe your child would rise up and crush the oppression, creating a planet of equilibrium,

All other children thus far haven't done it. I doubt one more would do the trick. Besides, it is unethical to gamble another's life, which is what every parent does. And the end result is death for the child anyways. So it's not even a gamble. It's a losing proposition.

As well, it is unethical to have a child for another's utility. How is that a gift at all, being born to be used for another's purpose? I stated this before, and you agreed. Do you now disagree?

SpheresOfBalance wrote:
that is, if they ever have that choice of whether life is forced or a gift, right now you're making that decision for them as if you are a god of all life.

Again, who am I making this decision for? No one and nothing. If I, myself, never existed, the outcome would be the same as my present stance; nothing. You, on the other hand, have actualized a child through procreation. You've made the decision for someone and something. You've created life, on a whim. If anyone acts as if they are the god of life, it is the creator of that life. It also makes you the god of death, as life is the necessary condition preceding death.

Me? If you want to call me a god, then I'm the god of nothing. I am mercy. There is no pain or suffering in nothingness, so why create the conditions for it? There are also no wants or desires (which, incidentally, left unfulfilled, creates suffering) in nothingness. It is your projection as a living, desirous, conscious being, that something is better than nothing, and that you are giving [gifting] something to nothing, that never cared, or could care, a whit for what you are offering. I think you misunderstand what nothing truly is, and isn't.

If you're a female, your telling your eggs, "no life." If a male then your sperm. They are both alive after all, yet you cause their existence to be in vain. The "nature" of the animal is to continue. Something ordained it! Either a God or the Universe, take your pick.

Are you a male or female. I'm sensing maleness, yes?

Look, I'd be the absolute last person to tell you that you should have a child today. Because I believe that over 7 billion people is far too many. But at the same time I see your philosophy as wrong. Primarily because your complaint about the people who run the show today could be changed by one child that grows up under your lessons and listens, but instead of just bitching about them actually does something about it. Albert Einstein was one person, as was Mother Teresa, as was Neil Armstrong, and Leonardo Di Vinci. Or pick your own favorite person that has contributed in the way you understand as fighting all that you see is wrong in this world. All of humanity is not bad, unfortunately it's just most of the ones that have been in charge.

Shit you consider your ideas as being superior or you wouldn't support them. Wouldn't it be true that if you claim to see the problems in the world, and feed your children on the ideas that set these things right, and that you did it in such a way that was the right way for them to respond favorably, that you could single handedly be the next Jesus Christ? Not in all the bad ways you may see him, but with just as much influence?

To say your children would be just as screwed up as the rest, surely places no faith in your philosophy, does it?

Are you just a disgruntled person that wants to see everything as shit, because you are shit?

NO, I'm not poking at you, just trying to provoke thought in your mind that may be new to you! Maybe not!

SOB!!!

I think you're more concerned about my psyche, than what I'm saying. We have different views. That much is clear. If you'd like to explore the topic of antinatalism further on your own, I'm more than happy to recommend books, blogs and philosophers. But I don't see this discussion providing value for either of us.

Dalek Prime wrote:I think you're more concerned about my psyche, than what I'm saying. We have different views. That much is clear. If you'd like to explore the topic of antinatalism further on your own, I'm more than happy to recommend books, blogs and philosophers. But I don't see this discussion providing value for either of us.

As if psyche can be separate from ones belief. It's not possible!

But I suspect you're correct, two hard headed people can only ever butt heads.

Cheers, SOB.

Dalek Prime wrote:

Cheers, SOB.

OK, but I'm the one on the right. Your turn!

Coming from a negative utilitarian viewpoint, I'll concede you the right (positive). (Bet you didn't think I'd let you off that easy, now, did you? C'mon, admit it... )

Dalek Prime wrote:Coming from a negative utilitarian viewpoint, I'll concede you the right (positive). (Bet you didn't think I'd let you off that easy, now, did you? C'mon, admit it... )

Thank you for argument, it can only ever cause one to think, lest one get carried away!

SpheresOfBalance wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:Coming from a negative utilitarian viewpoint, I'll concede you the right (positive). (Bet you didn't think I'd let you off that easy, now, did you? C'mon, admit it... )

Thank you for argument, it can only ever cause one to think, lest one get carried away!

You're an alright bloke, SOB. I do question myself often, to ensure I have not become lodged in an ideological hole. And since you did ask, I will tell you that my ideas have been formulating since I was young, and at 22 yo, had a vasectomy. I'm now 51, and never regretted it. But it was only since last summer that I started to read about antinatalism as a philosophy. First from the ecological standpoint eg. VHEMT, then on the ethical and teleological views. These readings gave focus to what I have, in retrospect, always believed, but didn't know how to voice. As an added bonus, strangely enough, they put my mind to rest on issues of a religious nature. God or no God just doesn't feel important to me anymore. It puts me at peace.

Cheers.

Dalek Prime wrote:

SpheresOfBalance wrote:

Dalek Prime wrote:Coming from a negative utilitarian viewpoint, I'll concede you the right (positive). (Bet you didn't think I'd let you off that easy, now, did you? C'mon, admit it... )

Thank you for argument, it can only ever cause one to think, lest one get carried away!

You're an alright bloke, SOB. I do question myself often, to ensure I have not become lodged in an ideological hole. And since you did ask, I will tell you that my ideas have been formulating since I was young, and at 22 yo, had a vasectomy. I'm now 51, and never regretted it. But it was only since last summer that I started to read about antinatalism as a philosophy. First from the ecological standpoint eg. VHEMT, then on the ethical and teleological views. These readings gave focus to what I have, in retrospect, always believed, but didn't know how to voice. As an added bonus, strangely enough, they put my mind to rest on issues of a religious nature. God or no God just doesn't feel important to me anymore. It puts me at peace.

Cheers.

And now, because you have shared a bit of your history, I understand your current philosophy much more clearly. Of course I also understand that if I knew all of you history, especially your childhood, it would be crystal clear. Most people are just not geared in a way that they would share such things, due to perceived vulnerability. This, at least I see, as a problem with humanity; fear of being marginalized by peers, as if that really matters, considering the 'much larger' human picture! Most just aren't concerned with that picture, only ever themselves, it would surely seem.

Again, make no mistake, I'm right there with you in terms of seeing that at over 7 billion strong we really don't need any more babies, and I salute you for being one of those that sacrifices their bloodline, as if it's really that important, for a far greater vision. Now don't be insulted please, but I see homosexuals also contributing to your cause, at least those that rear no children, or rear adopted children only. There's nothing wrong with caring for children currently in need of good parents, as there is no such thing as bad children, only ever bad parents. Of course I would trust that they do not outwardly promote any particular lifestyle, that children are only ever given facts as unbiased as possible.

I'm just funny, because despite my leanings, I always want to expose their truth, despite my self. At least I try and be as humble as I possibly can, in the analyzing of the reasoning of said leanings. So I tend to be a student of mankind's motivations, his psyche. Because what's contained within it are the reasons humans choose as they do. I mean what else are we?

And thanks for your approval, it's always good for one to find those that see things similarly to them, because then they're not so alone, and some hope is instilled. You seem to be an OK dude yourself.

Bloke = Brit?
Dude = Yank?

Though my sir name is of British origin, I was born and raised here. But I see myself as a man of the world, never a slave to any country, only ever a slave to the universe, that which caused us to be in the first place, whether believed it was intended or merely chance.

Cheers, my friend!