Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

MattiHayry t1_j8ybzqu wrote

Excerpt from Exit Duty Generator: - “If potential parents have a right to reproduce, then some not-yet-existing individuals have a duty to be born. To be born, however, means to be brought into an existence that contains fundamental need frustration. ... Parents would be entitled to reproduce at the expense of their children’s pain, anguish, and dwarfed autonomy. ... Since the reproducers’ claim is so bold, approaching bizarre, they do have a strong prima facie duty not to have children.” - Please read the article – or the bits concerning antinatalism (the PDF is easier on the eyes) - and talk to me. Where did I go wrong? What, if anything, did I get right? – The author is here, ready to answer all your questions. To greatness and beyond, together! :)

10

ThePhilosofyzr t1_j8zknpj wrote

My question is, & in a Nietzschean vein, is there value in continuing to suffer so that in the future we may have unanimous consent to self-eradicate as a species?

The value is an eventual unanimously consensual annihilation of our species, and an increase in autonomy in the interim due to increased normativity of others acting toward the same goal. I have run into Sorites paradox with this line of reasoning: n people in agreement is not unity; n+1 people in agreement is still not unity.

Unity of mind increases autonomy for the group in agreement, but begins to dwarf autonomy for those outside of the group, especially if the group is the large majority.

​

I don't think my thought process overcomes the reasoning for antinatalism in your version of negative utilitarianism, but perhaps a slow extinction due to partite participation in pro/anti-natalism increases FNF to a degree (both for existing & non-yet-existing persons) that there are additional duties for some not-yet-existing individuals to be born.

​

I am not an accredited philosopher in any sense of the word & I understand if you find my question frivolous. I wanted to note that your essay (article?) reinvigorated my interest in philosophy, as well as my participation in denouncing contemporary normative society as you have shown that the burden of proof lies upon the hegemony. I am looking forward to reading many of your other publications.

6

MattiHayry t1_j90kns4 wrote

Thank you! I will have to think about that - interesting angle that I have not thought about before. Philosophy (the academic kind, my kind) is slow, though, so it may take a while before I get there. But I appreciate the comment! :)

3