Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-27-2013, 09:32 AM
 
30 posts, read 29,026 times
Reputation: 58

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by elhelmete View Post
Where do you get this stuff?
Do you disagree with me? Why?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-27-2013, 10:31 AM
 
Location: Bike to Surf!
3,078 posts, read 11,090,788 times
Reputation: 3023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tele-Cat View Post
Show me one that doesn't begin with "I want," and we'll talk. Until then, yes, all reasons for having children are selfish.
Your discriminator is flawed. There are no reasons for decisions that cannot be written to begin with "I want" or "I don't want."

"I want to spare my potential offspring from a life that involves some suffering." The statement "I want" does not make this a selfish reason for not having children.

Here are a few (repeated) selfless reasons:

Having grandchildren will make my parents and my in-laws happy.

We are in a position to raise productive children who will benefit society. They might be a life-saving doctor, a job-creating entrepreneur, an engineer who creates machines to make people's lives better, an artist who interprets the beauty of the world around them, or a lawyer or judge who makes society more fair and just.

As a corollary, children are required to continue society. We will bear the burden of their upraising in order to continue human life, which we see as a good thing that benefits others.

Combining my, and my spouse's, genetics will deepen the gene pool and reduce the prevalence of recessive genetic conditions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2013, 10:34 AM
 
6,039 posts, read 6,086,247 times
Reputation: 16753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lira2 View Post
Do you disagree with me? Why?
Disagree? That's a way of putting it I suppose.

You imply logically that anything that involves self interest is selfish. Pedantic and not a useful tool here. By that logic, the child-free people who wax about worldwide travel and uninterrupted meals are equally selfish. Yay, I guess we're all selfish, you win the interwebs.

Would one say, "I know I'd be a bad parent," or, "I don't want kids," or, "I'm really not equipped to deal with the responsibilities of parenthood" or even, "I can't deal with poop" and leave it at that, those would be honest responses. What is the need to couch your choice to be child-free in terms other than that? I don't believe for a moment that you "love your potential children" as that highly abstract construct means nothing on any practical level whatsoever.

On the flip side, to be sure, there are many parents who have proven nothing other than they're capable of f****ng.

You say no parent would want to have and raise children if it wasn't pleasurable for them...? How would you know? What's the threshold, 99% pleasurable? 40%? My wife and I have our days...believe me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2013, 10:35 AM
 
19,018 posts, read 25,265,236 times
Reputation: 13486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lira2 View Post
Having children is always selfish because it always involves the interests of the parents. If raising children is selfless is a difficult question. Like a poster said, parents are benefited by this love that they feel for their children. Love feels good, benefits parents and it is what motivates parents to take care of their children. It still involves self-interest. Having and raising children is not altruistic.
No parent would want to have and raise children if it wasn't pleasurable for them.
A. It doesn't matter if the decision to have the child is selfish. B. It doesn't matter if there is a perceived benefit as far as daily selfless acts go. They take place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2013, 11:26 AM
 
878 posts, read 945,387 times
Reputation: 893
Quote:
Originally Posted by elhelmete View Post
Where do you get this stuff?
Sense. Clearly, from your post, it's not "common," but it's sensible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2013, 11:32 AM
 
878 posts, read 945,387 times
Reputation: 893
Quote:
Originally Posted by elhelmete View Post
What is the need to couch your choice to be child-free in terms other than that?
Because the childfree are often bombarded with breeder-bingo harassment, and we're sick of it. We're tired of having the questions even being asked.

Now, I will admit, the childfree must own their own role in said harassment, because the only reply needed to ANY question or statement about an individual's decision (or simply understanding they were born this way) to remain childfree is "none of your ****ing business."

Any other response that engages the harasser is a bad choice on the part of a childfree person.

"None of your ****ing business," is the ONLY response I ever give to anyone asking why I'm childfree. Some people don't like that and if they give me grief about my response, I simply walk away. People who harass the CF deserve shunning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2013, 11:38 AM
 
6,039 posts, read 6,086,247 times
Reputation: 16753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tele-Cat View Post
Because the childfree are often bombarded with breeder-bingo harassment, and we're sick of it. We're tired of having the questions even being asked.

Now, I will admit, the childfree must own their own role in said harassment, because the only reply needed to ANY question or statement about an individual's decision (or simply understanding they were born this way) to remain childfree is "none of your ****ing business."

Any other response that engages the harasser is a bad choice on the part of a childfree person.

"None of your ****ing business," is the ONLY response I ever give to anyone asking why I'm childfree. Some people don't like that and if they give me grief about my response, I simply walk away. People who harass the CF deserve shunning.
This is my point exactly. "None of your ****ing business," is in my opinion the only required answer as well. Layering on half-baked philosophy and illogical reasoning just calls the wrong sort of attention to the childfree person.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2013, 11:42 AM
 
41 posts, read 45,242 times
Reputation: 73
"If a tree falls in the forest, and no one hears it, it doesn't matter if it makes a sound. The sound is meaningless. If the universe exists but no separate entity exists to measure it, then it is meaningless. The universe only has meaning to us, (the only known entity separate and distinguishable from the universe) but that is still meaning."

The universe is meaningless, with or without human life in it. Meaning is just an illusion inside human minds. The universe doesn't become objectively meaningful because of sentient human life who ascribe meaning to it. While the universe may have value for humans, humans have no value for the universe and will never have.

"How can you define "harm" or"good" without a conscious mind to evaluate it? "

If there were no humans, there would be no need to evaluate anything. There would be absolutely no need for anything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2013, 11:47 AM
 
6,039 posts, read 6,086,247 times
Reputation: 16753
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorees View Post
"If a tree falls in the forest, and no one hears it, it doesn't matter if it makes a sound. The sound is meaningless. If the universe exists but no separate entity exists to measure it, then it is meaningless. The universe only has meaning to us, (the only known entity separate and distinguishable from the universe) but that is still meaning."

The universe is meaningless, with or without human life in it. Meaning is just an illusion inside human minds. The universe doesn't become objectively meaningful because of sentient human life who ascribe meaning to it. While the universe may have value for humans, humans have no value for the universe and will never have.

"How can you define "harm" or"good" without a conscious mind to evaluate it? "

If there were no humans, there would be no need to evaluate anything. There would be absolutely no need for anything.
Have fun with that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2013, 11:49 AM
 
Location: Bike to Surf!
3,078 posts, read 11,090,788 times
Reputation: 3023
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tele-Cat View Post
Because the childfree are often bombarded with breeder-bingo harassment, and we're sick of it. We're tired of having the questions even being asked.

"None of your ****ing business," is the ONLY response I ever give to anyone asking why I'm childfree. Some people don't like that and if they give me grief about my response, I simply walk away. People who harass the CF deserve shunning.
Who "harasses" you besides your own family and friends? How do they know you're child-free, and not just out while someone watches the kids? It's not like you wear an armband or anything. In my entire child-free existence, I've never had someone run up to me and scream "DO YOU HAVE CHILDREN!?" and then "WHY NOT!?! ARE YOU SELFISH OR SOMETHING!?!?" I think I've been asked before--usually by a doctor or some service person trying to understand my situation or needs, but never harassed.

If your friends are harassing you about your life choices, they're probably not really friends. I suppose you have no choice if its your family.

Since only breeders have any visible indication of their choice (when they go somewhere with children in tow) it seems like they are the only targets for harassment or praise from strangers.

Quote:
If there were no humans, there would be no need to evaluate anything. There would be absolutely no need for anything.
Exactly my point. Everything would be meaningless; there would be no need for anything. Thus, the presence of humans brings meaning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:12 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top