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

[Eddie Teach]

You had 4 but Max had none, so it evens out to 2.

[Martinus]

Perhaps let me rephrase the question into something that makes it less personal for you lot - would you consider it a right decision for someone who, say, has already 4 kids and has no financial means of raising them, to give birth to a 5th kid.

What would you say to such person if this person used the same reasoning for his or her decision as you just did (except for Valmy's, I think most of the other explanations are bullshit - by the simple fact that such a person in my scenario could very well use each of the justifications, except for Valmy's, in his or her defense).

[merithyn]

As to the OP, because I enjoy children. I enjoy playing with them, I enjoy raising them, and I enjoy being around them. To make it easier for all of those things to happen, I gave birth to them. Simple as that.

Perhaps you should have sticked to playing EQ. 

Not sure why you'd say that. I met my objective, clearly, and enjoyed it immensely. My children, my husband, and I are all pretty happy with life.

[Eddie Teach]

Perhaps let me rephrase the question into something that makes it less personal for you lot - would you consider it a right decision for someone who, say, has already 4 kids and has no financial means of raising them, to give birth to a 5th kid.

If they were pregnant, yes. But they should be using birth control.

[garbon]

What is funny about the question is that Marty seems to understand (and feel no need to justify) why he wants to have sex, but is confused by why people want children. Does he not even understand that HIS desire to fuck is nothing at all more than the physical manifestation of the desire to procreate that all living beings (in general) have by definition?

It's all biology.

That seems a bit reductive. Presumably Marti has sex (or doesn't as the case maybe) because it feels pleasurable - not because his genes are telling him he should ape procreative sex.

[garbon]

The premise that Valmy should feel guilty for wanting to raise his own offspring and not somebody else's is stupid and it's a shame he's buying into it. 

Oh well I'm not actually thinking that at all. Just thinking off of what Valmy said when he decided to play Marti's game.

It's funny how Peter Wiggin et consortes accuse people "of our ilk" of being self-dubting and defensive but are acting very defensive themselves, as if a mere question of their motives was somehow an attack on them personally. It reminds me of the reaction of religious people a bit when someone questions their faith.

We ain't in the same box, hon. Don't get uppity.

[Ideologue]

In any case I did feel an obligation, as an intelligent and able person, to bring kids into the world raised the right way with the right values and society does need a steady flow of children at a modest rate to keep things going.  We are well below this modest rate in alot of the first world so I felt like people needed to step up and fill out the next generation a bit.  I mean do you ever worry how so many of the next generation are being brought into the world by fundies and those in poverty?  Can progress be sustained like that?  That line of thinking made me think this is something I had an imperative to do to the best of my ability.

Given over population in general though, maybe we should just pick up little black and brown babies and raise them here?

Human nature being what it is, biological imperative and such, a widespread adoption program is only likely to get off the ground if we sterilize the First World.

I'll go get the tongs.

Again, your worldview proves to be quite inconsistent. You are a representative of a hillbilly left (the opposite of the caviar left) and the best example that you can take Ideologue out of the redneck-ness but you can't take the redneck-ness out of Ideologue.

I'm confused as to how making a stupid joke about popping people's gonads out with salad bar utensils exposes my worldview.

[Berkut]

I am not sure I understand the question, or rather, I don't understand why it was asked.

Isn't the *desire* for progeny a rather well understood phenomenon?  I wasn't really aware there was any need to explain it, even to those who do not share it.

It's the same reason Marty wants to have sex for example - because we are programmed to do so.

What is funny about the question is that Marty seems to understand (and feel no need to justify) why he wants to have sex, but is confused by why people want children. Does he not even understand that HIS desire to fuck is nothing at all more than the physical manifestation of the desire to procreate that all living beings (in general) have by definition?

It's all biology.

Still, the difference is quite clear - sex between two consenting adults does not concern anyone else and is entirely their decision to make, no? This is quite different from procreation which results in bringing a concious human being into the world in an act such being has no say about whatsoever - surely in such case you have to consider more than just a biological imperative, being a thinking, self-aware human being yourself, no?

But that isn't what you asked - you asked WHY people want to have kids. And the answer is because we are programmed to want to do so.

It is the exact same reason you want to have sex. Or to eat. Or to do any number of things you are programmed by biology to WANT to do.

I find it rather unsatisfactory that you of all people (who seems to have always prided himself on his rational thinking) would not see it and are happy to give up your rational decision making process to a "biological imperative" (which, as we know quite well, is not by far the ultimate justification of all our actions - otherwise we would not have a need for what we call "civilization").

THat makes no sense - what are you asking? I have not given up anything by acknowledging that my desires are largely rooted in my biology.

You might as well ask why I want to eat, why not just starve? Why let my biology dictate that I live, when my rational self can sit about and decide that life is not really rationally justified absent the biological drive for self preservation?

Why don't you just stop eating? The desire to live is just an irrational response programmed into you after all - your death won't really matter in the overall scheme of things, right? Surely a rational being such as yourself does not eat simply because you are a slave to your biology?

You eat because you are programmed to not want to die, because creatures without such programming do in fact die and then don't pass on their genes. It is the most basic of the basis of evolutionary biology. Only slightly less basic than that is the desire to actually pass on those genes via having children (or whatever means a given organism uses to procreate).

So that is, quite simply, the answer to the question of "Why do you want children". For the same reason you want to eat, and fuck, and shit, and do all the other things that living creatures do - because it is part of being alive. There is absolutely nothing at all not rational about that. Indeed, it is probably the most rational thing any living creature does.

[CountDeMoney]

We ain't in the same box, hon. Don't get uppity.

lulz, Martinus:  A Homo Even Other Homos Can't Fucking Stand

[garbon]

We ain't in the same box, hon. Don't get uppity.

lulz, Martinus:  A Homo Even Other Homos Can't Fucking Stand

I don't know. I mean I guess this thread gave us that Berkut thinks psychology is irrelevant. All decisions are down to biology.

[Ed Anger]

Mart has been: Excommunicated.

[Tamas]

We ain't in the same box, hon. Don't get uppity.

lulz, Martinus:  A Homo Even Other Homos Can't Fucking Stand

I don't know. I mean I guess this thread gave us that Berkut thinks psychology is irrelevant. All decisions are down to biology.

No. He says that basic instincts are down to biology.

you of course may argue that every decision is down to biology, since your brain IS a biological construct, but that wasnt his point, and this thread is fucked up enough (nowadays, Marty posting in a thread is enough for that to happen) without covering that as well

[merithyn]

I don't know. I mean I guess this thread gave us that Berkut thinks psychology is irrelevant. All decisions are down to biology.

I didn't get that from his post at all. I read it to mean that the basic desire stems from an innate need, but that the decision to do so is open to choice. Ergo, psychology does factor into the doing of the deed, if not specifically the desire to do so.

[Ed Anger]

When Mart posts, this is what I visualize:

[garbon]

We ain't in the same box, hon. Don't get uppity.

lulz, Martinus:  A Homo Even Other Homos Can't Fucking Stand

I don't know. I mean I guess this thread gave us that Berkut thinks psychology is irrelevant. All decisions are down to biology.

No. He says that basic instincts are down to biology.

you of course may argue that every decision is down to biology, since your brain IS a biological construct, but that wasnt his point, and this thread is fucked up enough (nowadays, Marty posting in a thread is enough for that to happen) without covering that as well

I'd say sex is more than just a basic instinct...as well as many of the items he cited.  There are so many decisions around who we fuck, why we fuck the people we fuck...why we eat the foods we eat. Saying that we are programmed to do basic things doesn't really answer why a given individual chooses to do something...and thus doesn't really answer Marti's (admittedly lame) question.