[split] Ethics - parental responsibility re: children

[GrandizerII]

Ok, sure, here's the Wiki link on antina...

Nah, on second thought, you're a very special person with a very unique view that no one has ever thought of before, please ignore.

Seriously, there are dozens of philosophers who have had the same thought and have actually managed to create some good arguments in favour of  it. David Benatar and Arthur Schopenhauer are probably the best examples, possibly the Buddha. Ahri might be onto something, but doesn't seem terribly capable of expressing it in a way that doesn't sound like, well, a mentally ill shitposter. And, yes, I have mental illnesses, but at least I can apply some degree of intellectual rigor to the question.

Maybe I could qualify the premise, say it's not automatically a bad thing, but that it does become one when one decides to bring a child into the world recklessly, without knowing how to care for it and/or knowing that you're going to doom it to a bad life with little chance of rising above it all and/or if you're not going to be prepared to prioritise its well-being over yours. Or I could point out that the experiences of the last decade or two are making bringing new life into the world an option less morally sound (say, that there's a vanishingly small window of time before our chances to do anything about global warming run out and that it's become blindingly obvious that we're going to miss the mark. Or, Hell, the fact that we've been dealing with a deadly virus for two years and people are bitterly divided about whether we should do anything about it.)

I think we can all agree that there are parents out there who shouldn't have had kids at all because of the trauma they inflict on them.

As for anti-natalism per se, I'm not sure what to think regarding the argument itself. I also don't think it's automatically bad to bring forth kids into this world. Nevertheless, it has been my observation that often times people want to have kids for selfish reasons, perhaps to impress their elders/relatives, to prove to themselves that they're now "adult enough", or because they want someone they can train to become the next math genius or best athlete ever (basically to have someone they can "legally" control for their own satisfaction). Of course, other times, people have kids because it's tradition, it's one of those milestones in life to be accomplished, and/or due to societal pressure.

From an individual perspective, especially (as you say) in this day and age, it's hard to think of a good reason to have kids, though I'm not at all against people having kids in general, even if they do it for selfish reasons (because one can still be a good parent nevertheless despite the reason they wanted to have kids). From a societal perspective, on the other hand, I can definitely see the benefits (in some settings, I mean) and would almost argue that it would be unethical not to have kids as a result.

Then again, the anti-natalist would counter this by rhetorically asking the question why humankind needs to progress at all anyway (which Ahri pretty much argued earlier in this thread). And once again, I find it's difficult to answer in a satisfactory manner. Maybe there isn't any good answer, but we're here anyway and we have kids and like having them, so that's that.

ETA: Or maybe there is at least one (I think). If people stopped having kids, then at some point there would be no young people to take care of the elderly in their last years of living. But again, doesn't sound very compelling on its own as a counter.