Calling Languish parents: Why did you decide to have children?

[Malthus]

Well yeah, we've all been pretty much sitting around marking time until Malthus chimes in.

Isn't that true of every thread?

How very flattering. 

Sure, if you choose to ignore the flippant sarcasm.

What sarcasm?

[Razgovory]

Hmm.
I suppose I should know better, but then again if I did I would avoid languish in the first place.

So I will pose a hypothetical.

Suppose tomorrow, Martinus is the ironic victim of a deranged cave troll, and is reduced to a coma.  Without extraordinary medical intervention, he will remain in that state indefinitely.  With extraordinary medical intervention, however, he can be restored to life and eventually regain full functioning.  The question is whether is would it be morally proper to take the steps to return Martinus to life.  Under most moral analyses not involving languish posters, bringing Martinus back to life would be a moral good.  Certainly I can think of nothing objectionable under a Kantian schema.  Yet under Martinus' analysis, including his rather idiosyncratic reading of the Kantian imperative, such an act is morally suspect, because there must be some independent justification for bringing the now defunct Martinus into the world.  Because Martinus, unlike most mainstream readings of Kant, appears to ascribe no value to human life in and of itself, it isn't enough to say that restoring Martinus to life is a good in and of itself.  Instead, we must search for some alternative rationale, such as that arguing that the restored Martinus would live a worth life of dignity and meaning.  Given the contestability of that premise, however, poor Martinus might be left in an unfortunately precarious position . . .

Fallacy. Every Kantian will tell you there is an absolute difference between a developed human being and only a potential human being. Hell, my philosophy professor at college argued that "women and children" first is the biggest moral failing of them all, since unlike adults, children are not fully developed human beings, and as such their lives are clearly less valuable. She was a Kantian.

Also a Pole.

[The Minsky Moment]

Every Kantian will tell you there is an absolute difference between a developed human being and only a potential human being.

You do realize you just fatally undermined your argument.
If a potential human being does not count morally as a person, then there can be no objection under the practical imperative to using it as a means.

So then the analysis becomes:
+ From the POV of the prospective parents, they are using a thing (non-person/potential personal) to help achieve the end of enriching their own lives.   Which is morally permissible, and perhaps even a positive good.
+ From the POV of the potential person, they are better off having the opportunity of an actual life than no opportunity at all.

And it's all good all around for all involved.

Hell, my philosophy professor at college argued that "women and children" first is the biggest moral failing of them all, since unlike adults, children are not fully developed human beings, and as such their lives are clearly less valuable. She was a Kantian.

And a Pole.

[Malthus]

See, I'm saying stuff you are afraid to say but you think anyway. Because deep inside you are annoyed by the looks and the whispers of "weird uncle Seedee, with his cats and no kids or wife" or how you are missing out on the true purpose of your life, according to the Languish benevolent paternalists. I yanked their chain for you, for Brazen, for the gays. You don't need to send the flowers.

I think those looks and whispers had more to do with the disappearance of hott Asian waitresses in the neighbourhood than with lack of children ... 

[CountDeMoney]

 

[merithyn]

See, I'm saying stuff you are afraid to say but you think anyway. Because deep inside you are annoyed by the looks and the whispers of "weird uncle Seedee, with his cats and no kids or wife" or how you are missing out on the true purpose of your life, according to the Languish benevolent paternalists. I yanked their chain for you, for Brazen, for the gays. You don't need to send the flowers.

I'm going to regret answering this post seriously, but here goes, anyway.

I am a parent of a lot of kids. I saw added value to my life in having children, so I had them. That does not mean, however, that I don't see value in not having children, too. In fact, probably because of all of my kids, I'm more likely to advise those who question if they should have children to wait or not to have them at all.

It's such a personal choice - and there are hundreds of reasons that make either choice perfectly reasonable - that one cannot outright say that one choice is better than another. Neither is inherently better than the other on the whole, since it has to be applied on a case-by-case basis.

Marti choosing not to have children benefited him far more than him choosing to have them, obviously, or he wouldn't be so smug about that decision. It was very much the best choice for him - and society, as luck would have it. Others chose differently for different reasons and with different outcomes. It just so happens that the societal norm is to choose to have children, so Marti's decision comes across as "wrong" to those who view different as wrong. In fact, it was very right for him, and there's value in that.

[The Minsky Moment]

Don't get all Danny Sickles on us now.

[garbon]

Martinus speaks for Martinus.  The others can handle their own business.

This.

[frunk]

Could it be we live in the best of all possible worlds, where some people choose to have children and Martinus doesn't?

[Neil]

Could it be we live in the best of all possible worlds, where some people choose to have children and Martinus doesn't?

Wouldn't that world be second best?  Surely a better world would be one in which Martinus' parents chose not to have children?

[DGuller]

Instead, we must search for some alternative rationale, such as that arguing that the restored Martinus would live a worth life of dignity and meaning.  Given the contestability of that premise, however, poor Martinus might be left in an unfortunately precarious position . . .

I love how Minsky can land a crushing kick to the nuts, and look refined and sophisticated throughout the procedure.

[DGuller]

Could it be we live in the best of all possible worlds, where some people choose to have children and Martinus doesn't?

Wouldn't that world be second best?  Surely a better world would be one in which Martinus' parents chose not to have children?

 

[Ed Anger]

Mart, have you ever asked your parents why they had you?

wins the thread 

Sorry, but Marti wins the thread by trolling all you idiots into participating in 12+ pages of his heterophobic bullshit.

And you knew it, too.  And you did it anyway.



"You know whats going to happen here in the morning? The whole damn forum is going to be here. They'll move through this thread, occupy these posts on the other side and when our people get here Marti will have the high ground. There will be the devil to pay! The high ground! Berkut will come in slowly, cautiously. New to command. They'll be on his back in The Off Topic Topic, wire hot with messages 'Post! Post!' So he will set up a ring around the Thread Starter. And when Marti's nicely entrenched behind fat posts on the high ground, Berkut will finally attack, if he can coordinate BB and Malthus. Straight up the thread, out in the open, in that gorgeous field of fire.

We will post valiantly... and be trolled valiantly! And afterwards posters in tall hats and gold watch fobs will thump their chest and say what a brave thread it was.

Katmai, I've led a mod's life, and I've never seen anything as brutally clear as this."

I think I came.

[crazy canuck]

Instead, we must search for some alternative rationale, such as that arguing that the restored Martinus would live a worth life of dignity and meaning.  Given the contestability of that premise, however, poor Martinus might be left in an unfortunately precarious position . . .

I love how Minsky can land a crushing kick to the nuts, and look refined and sophisticated throughout the procedure.

I am not sure Marti realizes what happened. 

[grumbler]

Too bad, otherwise I never would have guessed you started the thread to discuss Kantian philosophy.

In this case, it was a Kant of worms.