Lixy, I hate you and I want to eat your soul.
[quote]lixy wrote:
FlavaDave wrote:
lixy you are an idiot. you present all this bullshit as truth when i’m willing to bet it all that you have never looked at empirical studies with which to form your position. do you actually have any training in the subject or are you just putting forth your own “deep” thoughts?
I never presented anything as truth. That’s just a compilation of my observations. So instead of strawman-building and name-calling, why don’t you try deconstructing my argument?[/quote]
because your argument is just that bad
[quote]dk44 wrote:
Lixy, I hate you and I want to eat your soul.[/quote]
LOL!
Lixy’s right, unfortunately I think he hit a nerve with a lot of people here. Particularly those people who have conditioned themselves to believe their decision to have children was right, regardless of the outcome, and simply because there is no going back.
[quote]Make1tRa1n wrote:
Lixy’s right, unfortunately I think he hit a nerve with a lot of people here. Particularly those people who have conditioned themselves to believe their decision to have children was right, regardless of the outcome, and simply because there is no going back.
[/quote]
Right about people nowadays simply having kids to feed their own ego?
[quote]Backlash79 wrote:
Make1tRa1n wrote:
Lixy’s right, unfortunately I think he hit a nerve with a lot of people here. Particularly those people who have conditioned themselves to believe their decision to have children was right, regardless of the outcome, and simply because there is no going back.
Right about people nowadays simply having kids to feed their own ego?
[/quote]
Don’t forget how selfish parents are.
[quote]Make1tRa1n wrote:
Lixy’s right, unfortunately I think he hit a nerve with a lot of people here. Particularly those people who have conditioned themselves to believe their decision to have children was right, regardless of the outcome, and simply because there is no going back.
[/quote]
That may be true in some cases. However, how would he know, given that he himself has not had children? (if I recollect correctly on that point).
Sorry, but this assertion reminds me of those 13 year olds who hold, with certainty, opinions on all aspects of life with little or no experience in such matters.
[quote]entheogens wrote:
Make1tRa1n wrote:
Lixy’s right, unfortunately I think he hit a nerve with a lot of people here. Particularly those people who have conditioned themselves to believe their decision to have children was right, regardless of the outcome, and simply because there is no going back.
That may be true in some cases. However, how would he know, given that he himself has not had children? (if I recollect correctly on that point).
Sorry, but this assertion reminds me of those 13 year olds who hold, with certainty, opinions on all aspects of life with little or no experience in such matters. [/quote]
Where did you see anything about “certainty”? I merely stated an observation. Namely, that the traditional rationale for having kids (survival of the species) does not apply to our times. The reasons we have now come down to ego, animal instincts, sense of superiority, boredom or a matrimonial/financial insurance.
This is a most sensitive topic, and I never claimed to hold any kind of truth. I would love to hear sound arguments in favor of procreation. Ecologically and humanly, adoption seems to me far superior to breeding. But if you can show me where I’m wrong in this logic, I’ll be more than willing to change my position. The “you can’t understand because you don’t have children” is not much of an argument.
I share all the same sentiments with the people on this thread who don’t want kids, and I have ever since I was a kid myself. As I grow older, my desire to have children keeps growing smaller and smaller, which is hard to believe because it was pretty much non-existent to begin with.
My decision to not have children grows exponentially every single day because of what I see being done to my half-brother. My dad got remarried about 6 years ago, and he and my step mom had a kid. For the record, his name is Matthew, he’s fucking adorable, and I love him to death, BUT, if you’ve seen George Carlin’s “It’s Bad For Ya,” my dad and step mom are the exact type of parents he’s talking about.
They coddle this kid to the point where I have to rough him up every day and personally teach him what it means to be a man, and he’s 4! I’ve heard that you learn 85% of all the knowledge you will ever gain in your life between the ages of 2-5, and at this rate he’s going to turn out to be the stereotypical white-bread pussy who needs to have everything handed to him because he’ll never learn the values of patience and hard work. It literally sickens me, and I can do nothing but stand by and watch. I’m going to stop with that subject right here unless someone wants to speak on it further, because I could write a book on what terrible things they’re doing to this kid and how much I despise my step mother.
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
looks like my family name dies with me, lol I’m the only grandson[/quote]
This is the only reason I would ever want a child. I’m the fourth Alfred in my family, starting with my great grandfather who just died 2 years ago. I feel bad about having the legacy of the family name die with me, but that’s the only reason I would want a kid, and that’s just not reason enough. My whole family is going to be dead within the next 80 years anyway, so who cares?
-dizzle
[quote]entheogens wrote:
Make1tRa1n wrote:
Lixy’s right, unfortunately I think he hit a nerve with a lot of people here. Particularly those people who have conditioned themselves to believe their decision to have children was right, regardless of the outcome, and simply because there is no going back.
That may be true in some cases. However, how would he know, given that he himself has not had children? (if I recollect correctly on that point).
Sorry, but this assertion reminds me of those 13 year olds who hold, with certainty, opinions on all aspects of life with little or no experience in such matters.
[/quote]
I bow before your wisdom and age - how dare I form opinions on ‘all aspects of life’!
Forgive me for projecting - essentially that is what I am doing. Having children is a personal decision based on a lot of aspects inherent to a person’s faith and perception of the world.
Virtually any human behavior can ultimately be ascribed to “ego.” So there’s really no point in arguing with that. The only situation in which having one’s own child could NOT be considered an act of “ego” would be if a person did not want to have children, but was compelled by circumstances to procreate anyway, because of the needs of others. This is not a likely scenario.
But the ego argument is a lot like solipsism. It is internally consistent, or reasonably so, so it is difficult to refute.
There are plenty of sound reasons to have one’s own children. Perpetuating one’s own genes is one good reason of many. But the fact that there are good reasons does not directly refute that they are all ultimately grounded in “ego.”
[quote]nephorm wrote:
Virtually any human behavior can ultimately be ascribed to “ego.” So there’s really no point in arguing with that. The only situation in which having one’s own child could NOT be considered an act of “ego” would be if a person did not want to have children, but was compelled by circumstances to procreate anyway, because of the needs of others. This is not a likely scenario.
But the ego argument is a lot like solipsism. It is internally consistent, or reasonably so, so it is difficult to refute.
There are plenty of sound reasons to have one’s own children. Perpetuating one’s own genes is one good reason of many. But the fact that there are good reasons does not directly refute that they are all ultimately grounded in “ego.”[/quote]
How is perpetuating genes a good reason?
The context of ego in Lix’s argument pertained to the self-worth of an individual, where a person must procreate to gain or realize self-worth based on fitting in with cultural/biological regulations.
My 2 cents? I don’t want kids.
Every day I listen to the news or read the papers, I get the impression that this country (UK) is going further and further down the drain. In my opinion, this is no place to raise a child.
I’ve been in relationships with women who have children, and I’ve never had a problem with them (the children), in fact, I’ve actually become rather attached to one of them and still send him birthday presents. I’ve seen relationships where the woman get pregnant to try and fix the problems in the relationship (and I feel so sorry for those children).
Miscarriages have destroyed two of my relationships, the first wasn’t that big a loss, the second was with someone I’d willingly give up everything I have for.
When I was born, the doctors messed up the C-Section and my mother now has to wear a colostomy bag.
I’ve worked for short periods of time with children with various disabilities (short periods as in less than a day) and I can say without a shadow of a doubt that if I did have a child who had such a disability, I’m not a strong enough person to cope with it.
I don’t want children. The combination of the risk of them being born not completely healthy, the risk of the mother and / or the baby suffering because of the birth and the fact that I truely believe this country is going to shit and is only going to get worse makes children for me a definite no go area.
[quote]Make1tRa1n wrote:
How is perpetuating genes a good reason?
The context of ego in Lix’s argument pertained to the self-worth of an individual, where a person must procreate to gain or realize self-worth based on fitting in with cultural/biological regulations.
[/quote]
In that case, why is “ego” not a good enough reason?
[quote]Make1tRa1n wrote:
How is perpetuating genes a good reason?
[/quote]
It depends on the genes, I suppose. But if we individually think that we are valuable to society for whatever reason, then having kids hedges the likelihood that our valuable, heritable traits will be carried forward into future generations.
I understand the argument Lixy was making. And I could make that argument about virtually any human action whatsoever… including charity, adoption, intellectual achievements - whatever. Even eating could be argued to presuppose that my individual life is more valuable than the next person who might instead take the food. If you want to find it, you can turn every single thing that a person does into being a way to realize “self-worth.” The argument turns into a tautology.
[quote]lixy wrote:
This is a most sensitive topic, and I never claimed to hold any kind of truth. I would love to hear sound arguments in favor of procreation. Ecologically and humanly, adoption seems to me far superior to breeding. But if you can show me where I’m wrong in this logic, I’ll be more than willing to change my position. The “you can’t understand because you don’t have children” is not much of an argument. [/quote]
I tend to think you are correct in your analysis… but you are having a logical debate with emotional people. and thats not going to lead to a good outcome.
You’ll notice the people with kids, reduced themselves to call you names… they have a personal investment in the topic. attacking the validity of children is almost like attacking their very own children. soo… expect an emotional response.
My wife and I are going down this path.
I tried to rationally come up with a pro/con list for kids…
I came up with a billion reasons NOT to have children. and I really had no good reasons in the pro column.
So I spent some time and tried to really figure this whole thing out… and here is what i came up with. (granted all my reasons are emotion based, but being critical and logical is what allowed me to find the reasons i was looking for)
1)If I’m 50 or 60 or 70 and regret not having them, there is nothing i can do about it - it’s to late to go back at that point. I know how i feel about being alone today, but when I’m 70 i might feel differently.
2)taking my wife as a life partner, means i have to take her desires in to account. While i understand her desire is hormonal based, it doesn’t appear that way to her.
she just “feels” it. and logic doesn’t go over well with many women.
3)If you do have children, then one would assume you will love them… so if that’s the case and our time is finite, would you not want to spend as much time as possible with them?
4)I like my life the way it is, i don’t want it to change… well as much as i hate to realize it, it’s going to change with or without kids… so i cant let that be my deciding factor.
5)If i love my wife, how can i deny her the opportunity to be a mother and to experience the love of a child… not really fair.
soo those 5 really moved me from the “NO way” and put me in the “kicking and screaming” group… I’m going…just dragging my feet… My wife is pleased that I’ve given in and we are trying.
I figure whatever happens, happens and i will just deal with it.
If i cant, then I’m not much of a man or a husband.
[quote]FlavaDave wrote:
Make1tRa1n wrote:
How is perpetuating genes a good reason?
The context of ego in Lix’s argument pertained to the self-worth of an individual, where a person must procreate to gain or realize self-worth based on fitting in with cultural/biological regulations.
In that case, why is “ego” not a good enough reason?[/quote]
It’s a great reason for sheep. If you’re capable of independent thinking than you’ll realize that you don’t need a kid to fit in or to gain attention. Having a child because you must conform is pathetic. Sorry if I don’t want to sacrifice endless expenses and 20 years of my life because it’s ‘the thing you’re supposed to do’. Humans have broken themselves of cultural and biological mandates before, what is different about being expected to have children?
I’m interpreting his argument as I see it.
[quote]Make1tRa1n wrote:
In that case, why is “ego” not a good enough reason?
It’s a great reason for sheep. If you’re capable of independent thinking than you’ll realize that you don’t need a kid to fit in or to gain attention. Having a child because you must conform is pathetic.
I’m interpreting his argument as I see it. [/quote]
You are sorely underestimating how much of what any person does is influenced by society. However, I don’t think that’s the argument you’re making simply because if you actually knew anything about the topic you wouldn’t make that assertion.
What you’re saying is that peer pressure isn’t a good enough reason to have children? Nobody has argued against that to my knowledge.
[quote]nephorm wrote:
Make1tRa1n wrote:
How is perpetuating genes a good reason?
It depends on the genes, I suppose. But if we individually think that we are valuable to society for whatever reason, then having kids hedges the likelihood that our valuable, heritable traits will be carried forward into future generations.
The context of ego in Lix’s argument pertained to the self-worth of an individual, where a person must procreate to gain or realize self-worth based on fitting in with cultural/biological regulations.
I understand the argument Lixy was making. And I could make that argument about virtually any human action whatsoever… including charity, adoption, intellectual achievements - whatever. Even eating could be argued to presuppose that my individual life is more valuable than the next person who might instead take the food. If you want to find it, you can turn every single thing that a person does into being a way to realize “self-worth.” The argument turns into a tautology.
[/quote]
Good argument, but what I am getting at is that the parent’s primary concern is with their self-worth. This situation is a two way street.
Basically the parent has formed a cathexis in the notion of having a child, not the actual being.
I’d build a truth table to test it but I’m supposed to be busy.
[quote]lixy wrote:
entheogens wrote:
Make1tRa1n wrote:
Lixy’s right, unfortunately I think he hit a nerve with a lot of people here. Particularly those people who have conditioned themselves to believe their decision to have children was right, regardless of the outcome, and simply because there is no going back.
That may be true in some cases. However, how would he know, given that he himself has not had children? (if I recollect correctly on that point).
Sorry, but this assertion reminds me of those 13 year olds who hold, with certainty, opinions on all aspects of life with little or no experience in such matters.
Where did you see anything about “certainty”? I merely stated an observation. Namely, that the traditional rationale for having kids (survival of the species) does not apply to our times. … [/quote]
Are you serious? Are people now immortal?