Differences regarding applicability and justifiability persist (though there could be a change). If there is a criteria for prior acceptance with rega...
Of course it isn't—but it can be an acceptable substitute provided one would agree for a thing even if they would be in a situation they couldn't get ...
If hypothetical dissent is deemed to be possible (which is what makes the very concept of consent applicable vis-à-vis creation), then I believe that ...
Fair enough. As far as I am concerned, even if satisfaction and dissatisfaction are positive and negative, the negatives do not have pre-eminence. One...
I don't think he is being egotistical. He's trying to explain what appears to be obvious to him. Despite of our differences, I am glad that such discu...
Living together and cooperating in order to make the world a more joyous place for all is also a good option ;) The negatives or dissatisfaction can a...
An "imposition" cannot exist if there isn't a person whose already existent interests are being violate. In addition, one could also point out the fac...
Hello, I sent a message to you regarding something I think you had mentioned somewhere. I shall appreciate a response. Apologies for any inconvenience...
There's boredom, but there's also fulfillment (especially when one learns to restrict unnecessary desires). If harm is inherent in being, then so is b...
I appreciate your kind words. It was just a thought-provoking discussion, and in general, Schopenhauer 1 knows a lot about life and philosophy as a wh...
My point was that if it can be good to prevent harms, it can also be problematic to not create any joy. The response of absent joys not leading to a d...
Which, in turn, was only a response to the idea that it's necessary to prevent harms but not important to create goods. Again, it's quite important to...
It wasn't a mischaracterisation. It was merely a response to the claim that the absence of happiness does not matter because nobody is feeling deprive...
You've given me many empty assertions and double standards, which is something I had predicted before. I only want a consistent view regarding state o...
It's evident that you wish to put on an intellectual blindfold when to comes to your position. I haven't done much except for arguing for a consistent...
I don't care about your arbitrary claims anymore. For the last time, if the absence of joy doesn't matter due to an absence of an actual deprivation, ...
Neither does the absence of damage, because nobody is relieved from their absence. If absence of happiness only matters when there is a conscious feel...
Pointless repetition. I also don't care about nonexistent beings experiencing deprivation. Sticking with consistency and caring about the benefits tha...
Weasel to messiah—quite a metamorphosis! The point is that even if it's somewhat good (due to lack of harms), it cannot be entirely good (since all be...
Great joy can certainly be found amidst suffering. Many people have a superficial idea of pleasure that is limited to a few pleasant experiences. I ce...
Preventing suffering at the cost of all joy can never be moral in the ultimate sense. Whether or not it can be a damage/benefit if it doesn't fulfill/...
Call me whatever you want to, my friend :) I don't have any prejudices against weasels :p It's certainly important. However, it's also important that ...
As always, ignore the facts on the ground whenever truth confronts one. Tragic yet unsurprising. There is no benefit in one case and there is benefit ...
It's not a straw man, but I am sure you'll keep ignoring my points in order to avoid the truth. Nobody being deprived of happiness was about people wh...
If preventing the harm was necessary even though we don't have evidence for souls in nonexistence desiring it, the creation of the blessing is certain...
Ah yes, creating a life permeated with invaluable bliss is only not an "issue" instead of being a genuine good. Quite sensible and intuitive (especial...
Thankfully, one isn't being forced to do something against their interests when they are created ;) It's equally paternalistic to proclaim from the to...
No, it's equally important to create joys and opportunities (though this might be expressed differently when it comes to existing people due to the fa...
Yeah, some people mistakenly think that being an antinatalist means that you should end your life/harm other people. While I have met some who did esp...
In other words, negative experiences. I never said that there's just joy. However, it's also true that many people can find their lives to be unfathom...
I use the term to mean the same thing: negative experiences that would affect a person. And goods/benefits/whatever one wants to call them are also pe...
The parent who decides to create a person, whose harms/benefits were being discussed. It's truly amusing. The need to create ethereal joys does matter...
It's true that nonexistence cannot have any value. There's no satisfaction/frustration of interests of a person when they are created. This view can b...
For existing people who already have decent lives? Probably not. As for procreation, I do think it is. But as I said before, this would be true if all...
It's not necessary to not create it either. You are either creating a benefit (along with some harms) or you are not. I've already disputed the claim ...
"Wouldn't be a moral issue" isn't the same as a genuine good. ;) Moving on. I have always made it about the things that matter, even though there have...
Emotions don't constitute reason. Sure, just because one doesn't exist to ask for a good life, it's somehow not good to create someone in a blissful h...
I am not sure about the relevance of your point. I never averred that the parents or the states of affairs aren't pertinent. But it's true that the de...
Thankfully, that conversation wouldn't be any more necessary than "glad you could create this amazing life that I couldn't have asked for enjoying bef...
I have a feeling that arbitrary double standards will start popping up soon. 1. For existing people, the lack of creation could certainly cause harm. ...
You're the one who keeps missing the point. I like forks more. Yes, the parent should rationally decide whether or not it's a good idea to ignore one ...
I haven't straw manned you (as far as I am aware). I think you're the one who keeps prevaricating in order to attempt to defend the indefensible. 1. C...
It isn't, but it's fine if you wish to believe that ;) I did because I agreed that it can be good to not create a harmful state of affairs. Lack of un...
Yup, there's little point in continuing when there's an obstinate refusal to be consistent. I don't think that the lack of harms (or happiness) necess...
There's no asymmetry (lack of procreation does not lead to a tangible benefit for a person either), but thanks for the valuable contribution. There is...
"Antecedent Nazi"—now that's a new idea :p No problem. Glad we sorted this out. I'll continue to excavate the different threads here in order to conti...
Oh, I am so sorry—I didn't make myself clear enough. What I meant was that I had a similar discussion with Bartricks before, so I wanted to say that I...
Comments