Emerging Voices | IMDB v2.1

Emerging Voices Apr 20, 2018 1:10:17 GMT

Quote

Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2018 1:10:17 GMT

Apr 19, 2018 13:41:53 GMT viola said:

Apr 18, 2018 23:58:20 GMT @miccee said:

Interesting that you "feel the need to oppose it" by not directly addressing anyone actually propounding antinatalist views and instead hiding your opposition in a thread with a title that has nothing to do with antinatalism.

I think that people should be allowed to determine how much suffering is worth the reward for themselves. I do not think that they should be freely able to drag along other people in their joy ride, when all the needs, desires and goals for doing so reside only in the mind of the people doing the imposing, and the costs will almost entirely be paid by the person upon whom the burden is being imposed.

Evolution does not work towards creating 'satisfied' and 'happy' beings, it works towards creating organisms that are best adapted to surviving in the environment in which they reside. In the case of sentient organisms, suffering is the mechanism which drives evolutionary success. An organism whose baseline disposition is one of satisfaction is one that is not strongly motivated to compete with other organisms; nor even strongly motivated to meet its own biological needs for continued living.

This thread has evolved from one about control of the media (one way voices emerge,) to one encompassing other forms of control. Your position has been formed by cultural forces in line with those that ended the fairness doctrine -- using Darwinism rather than earlier forms of belief to justify itself. You seem to accept this appeal to an "objective" morality, but are guided by some feeling that life is "torture." My last post shows evidence that this feeling is at most a phenotypic response to the environment (including the culture that arose from the aforementioned forces.) Thus, these feelings are treatable and not metaphysical.

goz : I think this answers your question also -- Let me know!

OK, I think I understand your reasoning. Sparing consideration for those who are less fortunate than you is a hallmark of borderline personality disorder, and I ought to seek out 'treatment' so that I can come round to your 'right' way of thinking that 'as long as I get what I want, it doesn't matter who else is stuck having to pay the cost'.

Life is not 'torture' for me. It's an onerous imposition, but I manage it tolerably. Mostly because I'm relatively fortunate (in some ways) compared to many others. But I can't in good conscience ignore the fact that we're imposing catastrophically high costs on people who haven't consented to pay the bill. You think that my philosophy is an irrational reaction to 'cultural forces', but haven't stopped to question the heroic narrative that you have bought into whereby there's some need for us to keep creating more (infinitely precious) humans otherwise God will cry? That when you bring a child into the world, you're saving them from the torment of non-existence, and all the hazards that they will face are a small price to pay and that they should be thankful, even if they are born into a life of unremitting pain, toil, exploitation and hardship?