What is the scientific reason for antinatalism?
>>7943695
>antinatalism
>>7943695
>antinatalism
>>7943695
The same as that for white guilt probably.
>>7943695
>>antinatalism
>>7943695
>antinatalism
>>7943729
What did you expect? The only good reason for 'antinatalism' is obviously to counter overpopulation, anything else is fedora-tier.
>>7943729
>troglodyte
>>7943737
i like fedora
>>7943744
>fedoras
>>7943729
Unable to fathom anything coherent along the spectrum of common sense to objective materialism and on to metaphysics, anon attempts to defend a concept for a book of the most mind numbing retarded delusion that even being in the same thread as it causes lowering of the IQ, torticollis, and pruritis.
>>7943729
Ideas built upon hedonism are generally completely worthless, because if you claim to subscribe to such an ideology and haven't killed yourself yet you are a hypocrite.
>>7943695
Not a "scientific" reason, rather a personal one: I do not want to see my child suffering. Having a white child in a soon-to-be islamic country would be torture for the child. I don't want my son to become victim of racism, discrimination and violence.
>>7943695
It's a philosophical position, why would you expect a scientific reason for that?
"If children were brought into the world by an act of pure reason alone, would the human race continue to exist? Would not a man rather have so much sympathy with the coming generation as to spare it the burden of existence, or at any rate not take it upon himself to impose that burden upon it in cold blood?" - Schopenhauer
>>7943749
Scoobs can wear a fedora where ever he wants.
>>7943696
>>7943700
>>7943714
>>7943722
>>7943737
>yfw antinatalists believe in objective morality
>yfw antinatalists cannot show objective morality to exist
>yfw antinatalists rely on God for objective morality
>yfw antinatalists cannot show that God exists
>>7943695
Also, this book sums itself in the first few paragraphs when the author is unsure on determining universal values.
>>7944963
>muh straw man
Antinatalism doesn't imply objective morality.
>>7944966
>Antinatalism doesn't imply objective morality.
What does it imply? It is a moral standpoint and one that relies on universal values.
>>7944970
It's a personal decision. Morality is nothing more than subjective preferences.
>>7944985
Have you read the book posted in OP?
>>7944993
No, I only read STEM books.
>>7944997
Then what am I arguing with here?
A personal choice based on what exactly? A set of values? A set of values you believe are universal to your offspring? Who may or may not want to exist? Are you an oracle?
Anywho, I'm done here.
>>7945005
Sorry for having common sense. I'm sure my offspring doesn't want to suffer.
>>7945005
Are you saying this book written by a fucking no-name dipshit is the sole authority on the topic of antinatalism?
You make it sound like a mental illness, which I've never been victim to. I have thought it about the idea in my youth.
>science
>>7944997
>I only read STEM books.
>>7943695
Ask a child if it wants to be brought into existence? You might as well ask a shoot if it wants to break its way through concrete in order to grow. Of course it does. It will go through anything in order to exist.
Where do people get these sickly ideas like antinatalism? A mixture of depression and never having come out of their own introspection long enough to have noticed how nature is. Sad.
more of a philosophical question. Scientifically there is no reason.
