I hate my parents for giving me birth, because my life is pure suffering, and I don’t like it

  • you
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 years ago

    Tritely answering the title: Because the process of evolution has selected for organisms that are highly motivated towards reproducing. Organisms that aren’t highly motivated towards reproducing have been out-competed. The process of evolution doesn’t really care about how good of a parent you are, as long as your children also reproduce.

    More directly answering the question: It helps to invoke the Principle of Charity, and assume that people are well-intentioned, but perhaps unskilled at parenting. Regardless, realize that life as a minor is only a fraction of your lifespan, and that having suffered under bad parenting sets you up to realize what not to do with your children.

  • wraptile
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 years ago

    Because majority of people are not suffering and enjoy living so it’s a safe assumption that your offspring will too.

    Reproduction also is rewarding in many ways - from biological fulfillment to emotional and philosophical benefits and achievements.

    Finally if you’re an atheist that is the only way to leave biological footprint on this planet. Some might even argue its a form of self cloning which I would somewhat agree with as you propogate biologically as well as philosophically by teaching your kids your values.

  • jwinnie
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 years ago

    You’re describing a philosophical position known as anti-natalism.

    Not only is life pure suffering, it also damages the environment - since humans are in competition with other species for survival, every human being that survives means another animal of another species that has to die. And it takes tremendous resources - think fossil fuels and minerals - to keep a human being reasonably happy and healthy, resources which are both non-renewable and cause damage to the environment when they are extracted and/or used.

    • ksynwa
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 years ago

      And it takes tremendous resources - think fossil fuels and minerals - to keep a human being reasonably happy and healthy, resources which are both non-renewable and cause damage to the environment when they are extracted and/or used.

      yeah this is an extremely West/First World-centric way of looking at it

    • Stoned_Ape
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 years ago

      Humans are animals. We are also part of the environment. I think humans are a normal and natural part of life on this planet. Simply for the reason that we can’t say what is a “normal natural life” and what is not. How would we decide?

      • wraptile
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 years ago

        This is called naturalistic fallacy and it sucks. As a vegetarian I hear it almost every time I’m unfortunate enough to be involved in dietary discussions: “bUt HUmaNs eVolVEd tO eAt MEaT”

        There’s no such thing as “natural” as everything is “natural”.

        • ksynwa
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 years ago

          that is not at all what they are trying to say. i think their point is that human beings (the species) is a part and product of nature and not a phenomenon detached from nature, even though we process a disproportionate capacity to mold and many times hard nature. (for this part keep in mind I am vegan myself) some animals dying for humans is not a solid ground for anti-natalism unless you have hold a mutated form of malthusian hatred for the human population.

          • wraptile
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 years ago

            I’m not sure what you’re implying here - we seem to be in an agreement. I was agreeing with Stoned_ape and naming the fallacy original poster used to argue in favor of anti-natalism

      • jwinnie
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 years ago

        I would argue that it doesn’t matter what’s natural or not - killing is wrong, and unless you’re vegan, having children is killing since the greater the human population the greater the number of animals that need to die to feed it.

        • Stoned_Ape
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 years ago

          Vegans are also killing natural life. They only exclude some animals from the killing. Jainists go further, but they also can not live without disturbing and possibly killing other life. Source: I grow crops in my garden, and I can’t do any simple thing there without wrecking havoc on small and tiny animals.

          It is just how it is. I understand why vegans do it. But the reason can’t be “to not harm any animal”. It’s just not possible. Literally not possible. You’d have to live on the ISS to pull that off… and we wouldn’t have that station without disturbing and killing a great deal of life on planet earth.

    • Kamui
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 years ago

      This is mostly my reasoning on not having children. I don’t understand why, if in most parts of the world, the bible is such a big thing, why do people have children? To elaborate, there is a section in the bible detailing the “end of times” and how there will be widespread ruin and suffering and such. With this knowledge and the prevalence of religiosity, why would people birth children knowing that their children could experience all that suffering? I suppose it may very well be how others have commented, in that it’s just simply being part of a “natural order” to have kids. idk

  • boo
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    4 years ago

    Sometimes it’s not planned, people just have sex and get pregnant. When that happens they will have a child (some opt for an abortion but I don’t know the statistics).

    But even if that’s the only reason, the child/future-adult life can still be a good one. They can also make the parents/family happier simply by existing.

    So, sometimes the reason is “no reason, but it happens”.

    And specifically about you, even if your life is miserable right now it can (and a lot of times do) get better. I’m not guaranteeing it will, but there’s a big chance, so hang in there.

  • schwartz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 years ago

    My wife always wanted children, but I didn’t. Then we met, and I wanted to have children with her. I can’t promise my kids won’t suffer, but they sure as hell aren’t suffering now.

  • ajz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    deleted by creator

  • jazzness
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 years ago

    One thing that can happen when you have children is that your perspective widens and you see that you are just one part of something that is immensely bigger. This can be freeing, as it takes focus of oneself and puts one’s own problems in perspective.

    There often is a significant part of our suffering that is not caused by the outside but by how we relate to it. Children teach you that very quickly.

    To answer your question, some people may yearn for being able to care for someone, to feel love. Of course there are other ways to get there, but maybe not all these waya are visible at all times. Of course there are other reasons too.

    As someone else suggested, look into philosophy and perhaps Buddhism. The latter focuses a lot on suffering, where it comes from and how to get over it.

  • Handymancopy
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 years ago

    Have kids and make their life suck too. Maybe you’ll get a kick out of it. Maybe you won’t.

  • 1st
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    4 years ago

    Because they enjoy life and assumed you would too. I encourage you to look at life from a different lens. Your here, why not enjoy it? That is unless you have depression. I can’t really say anything about that, but I suggest taking some sort of anti depressants or something similar.

      • 1st
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 years ago

        Yeah. I don’t really know much about depression. One of my friends has it but he does not talk about it much.

    • skrlet13
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 years ago

      Automedication of anti depressants can be very dangerous