schopenhauer1

People were responding to my last comments generally, then you swooped in there like you owned the place.. Please. We've discussed this before. We've ...

Why do you state it like I don't understand this? Replace "pleasure" though with happiness or "positives".

Right there are many positions, but you lump despite this. Anyways, the "non-identity" issue works AGAINST natalism. That is to say, if we believe in ...

Again with the THE. It's not ONE position. The "gist" is not having children. The arguments are numerous and nuanced. To lump it in as "the" position ...

There’s a lot of AN positions so it’s easy to pick and choose strawmen. What “general ones”? Even Benatar, the most well known proponent, is misconstr...

I'm just watching as you all wildly miss the mark on antinatalism. I do love it when others try to argue it, but I also cringe at the misguided notion...

That premise is misguided or misleading in either one of two ways: 1) If humans came here naturally, then anything can be justified as it came about f...

That's not reification. You are giving ethical powers to nature. Ethics are usually things that are in the realm of human decisions. Are you willfully...

That's not reification. Reification is this: In your case, you were treating nature/necessity as something which we need to have fidelity for. In the ...

Don't know what the other person would say, but your use of "necessity" here is the problem. Necessity is being used in some ethical fashion. We aren'...

So this is going to be a round about way of answering contra your view on death using antinatalism as a counterpoint... Antinatalism is a decision tha...

Antinatalism can take many forms, but most antinatalism is not about preventing various environmental or population outcomes but due to not wanting to...

No. Again, it IS from the perspective of the parent. You CAN project onto the future and see hypotheticals. Someone DID NOT SUFFER (that could have). ...

Don't look now, but you are making my arguments... Yeah reformulate it to take the child out of the equation. It's about the parent. However, I am not...

So again, for another time, the point is about the act of the parent, not the child. Do YOU (the potential parent) want to prevent suffering for anoth...

You still haven’t paid attention to preventative vs mitigative. One you’re already existing and now mitigation measures are appropriate. The other, yo...

Yep :up:

Antinatalism need not be synonymous with philosophical pessimism, though the two concepts are often related. Antinatalism only requires certain logica...

Hmm, seems to be suspicious. Interestingly, here’s a recent article about water shortage in Mexico and US-Mexican border. Doesn’t look good. https://w...

Agreed. But I wonder if much of the billions of dollars goes into Coca-Cola for their bottled water and services related to that, rather than maintain...

Thank you. This is the kind of response I was looking for. It looks like you are pretty familiar with the issues surrounding water. Do you know the re...

Indeed. And I'm not going to say I know whether big infrastructure projects help or hurt the economy in developing countries, but I would imagine some...

Right, and I acknowledged the reality vs the ideal. But my question was why that wouldn’t it be priority number 1. Why isn’t there an Agua Potable par...

Indeed, thanks for the response! A couple things to note.. There are two things we are discussing, and they are a bit diferent: 1) The water shortage ...

Ah no problems. Not sure how I thought Brazil, sorry! Does the DR also have similar water problems.. if a tourist went there are they advised to drink...

@"Manuel", if I remember, you are from Brazil, so in the hemisphere. Maybe you can speak to this.

@"BC", randomly picking you, but you seem to be in the know about random political things, current and historical :D.

You'd have to qualify this again in context. Perhaps I wasn't really addressing your objection. But I'd say we can move this to the other thread as I ...

Two things here... Isn't Kant's philosophy predicated on a "free will"? So that being said, having the maximum playing field to enact one's will freel...

Because only when born is it paternalistic, as there is someone aggressed. The aggression only works one way. No, going back to the Kant thread, not p...

I answered your hypothetical

Makes it unique, but not out of kilter.

Im not ignoring anything. But I’ll look at the rest

I mean again, Kant thought not lying to a killer was appropriate if one was to be truly moral, assuming with a straight face, so I guess any philosoph...

That would be a strawman to what I am saying as I never said that someone's choice should be limited here, so not sure why this part is necessary to i...

Again, my point.

You almost understand my AN ethic.. That is to say, to create someone who will suffer unnecessarily is to use them as a means for something other than...

That is to say, to create someone who will suffer unnecessarily is to use them as a means for something other than the person. As the person wasn't ev...

If suffering is given a priority and is tied into not using people as a mere means to an end, then it certainly can be deontological to not cause unne...

But that's my point, dear Leontiskos, that negative ethics take priority! One doesn't violate the negative ethics to promote some welfare creating one...

I wasn't saying that example was an example of using "mere" for justification. But of course, there are others that are more egregiously so. Well, it ...

I responded that “mere” should not be an excuse to cause harm, by use of it as justification to do so. This is why I made a distinction between preven...

:razz: Well I provided my response

Yes clearly I don't agree with this idea. Merely allows a LOT of leeway. But say we are granted "merely", I don't think causing (all future) harm to m...

That's the crux of it. There can be a lot more: Don't cause harm, and justify it by mitigating harm if you didn't have to. Don't assume for others wha...

Yeah sure, but I'm not sure that contradicts what I was saying about dignity. If you don't want to follow a maxim, don't follow a maxim.. According to...

I am not getting what you mean. Kant would say we follow our inclination but should follow a moral maxim.

It's more complicated I should say. All things being equal, certainly feeding the hungry is recognizing dignity. But if you save a person after puttin...

About that, I think the second formulation and the "not causing suffering" go together, so can be uncoupled by the, as you say, "Christian trappings" ...

But my point was that maybe one cannot discern this is "a good thing". For example, if I tell myself, "Don't make the cashier go back to the register ...