If we’re going to entertain non-existent people who don’t want to exist, we are obligated to consider non-existent people who do want to exist.
People who are happy to be alive does not “pay” for bringing someone unhappy into existence. In fact if you really think that you can justify all sorts of morally reprehensible things.
But that isn’t precisely my point.
Let me repeat: No one consents to being born. You cannot ask someone ahead of time if they’d like to be born. Any person born owes absolutely nothing to their parents and almost nothing to everyone else other than basic respect. Until of course they themselves give birth, and then they owe an infinite and unpayable debt to their children.
Even if your child is perfectly content being alive throughout their life, they did not choose to be here. You brought them here and thus you still owe them a debt.
Sorry for the late response, I only have access to this account at work.
Why is that good?
Its in opposition to bad. Its better as a result.
The claim is that people who experience unhappiness shouldn’t exist.
The claim is that unhappy people are not morally compensated by there being happy people.
Why would I accept a precisionless “unhappy” on these terms?
Because precision measurement of the amount of it doesn’t matter. If you know what unhappiness is that’s all you need.
They would still exist as something. Children don’t appear ex nihilio.
Like, the atoms that would eventually come to make up their body exist? I legitimately don’t understand what you are trying to say. Do you believe in souls or something?
Your argument isn’t for non-existence. It is for non-sentience.
Sure? If you don’t exist you aren’t sentient, because you need to exist for that.
Removed by mod
There are other things you can do other than mindlessly grind for wealth or drag another non-consenting consciousness or two into existence.
Removed by mod
People who are happy to be alive does not “pay” for bringing someone unhappy into existence. In fact if you really think that you can justify all sorts of morally reprehensible things.
But that isn’t precisely my point.
Let me repeat: No one consents to being born. You cannot ask someone ahead of time if they’d like to be born. Any person born owes absolutely nothing to their parents and almost nothing to everyone else other than basic respect. Until of course they themselves give birth, and then they owe an infinite and unpayable debt to their children.
Even if your child is perfectly content being alive throughout their life, they did not choose to be here. You brought them here and thus you still owe them a debt.
Removed by mod
Because… inert matter doesn’t make decisions…
As long as you accept the premise that some people are happy and some people are unhappy, I don’t think measuring it for precision matters.
They wouldn’t be a child if they were never born to begin with.
Removed by mod
Sorry for the late response, I only have access to this account at work.
Its in opposition to bad. Its better as a result.
The claim is that unhappy people are not morally compensated by there being happy people.
Because precision measurement of the amount of it doesn’t matter. If you know what unhappiness is that’s all you need.
Like, the atoms that would eventually come to make up their body exist? I legitimately don’t understand what you are trying to say. Do you believe in souls or something?
Sure? If you don’t exist you aren’t sentient, because you need to exist for that.
Removed by mod