they're not doing a very good job imo! just observing that "people have kids because they want them" doesn't really move the needle for me, on the anti-natalist question
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
I mean, it doesn't for me either. I'm just saying that seems likely to be the perspective that they're asserting (from the limited context you have provided).
I think its more like you have to pre-suppose anti-natalism to be able to understand where the person is coming from, like why would you bring another person in to this world (bad) for purely selfish reasons?
that claim seems contingent on how good we think life is, right. It would be okay for me to give you a million dollars, even if I do so for selfish reasons
Does the anti-natalist have to answer that, though? The usual argument is there's no worry with denying a good life to the unborn on account of them not existing, but there is a risk of giving a bad life to the born, and you can only weight that against your wants before taking that risk.
Oh well, I disagree with that argument, but sure that's reasonable. But it nevertheless isn't actually really argued with "parents have kids because they want to"
to be clear, i agree that if you only give weight to the possible negatives of existing and not the possible positives, it makes sense to think we shouldn't have kids. but this seems kinda arbitrary to me, no?
absolutely, this is just someone thinking out loud on social media and not someone who is actively trying to convince people of the anti-natalist cause
Right. I misspoke before. They're not arguing the position of anti-natalism; they're arguing FROM the position of anti-natalism. They're taking their own view for granted, which I think is unremarkable.
Comments
You're taking a strange position where use language to make it sound less selfish (share life with them).
The point "wanting kids is not a good enough reason to have them" is strong