Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Talk about anything and everything.

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby Eos » 4 July 2021, 04:27

Bellesedai wrote:My outlook on it is this:

I don't think the world is going to get better through purely accidental procreation that leaves children in the hands of people who aren't responsible enough to be parents.

The more people who find ways to forge intentional families, genetically related or otherwise, the better.

Do you judge men who provide semen to lesbian couples who want a baby this hard? If not, why? Certainly they are at least in part operating from the same desire.



And we tend to forgot that straight couple can bring people into the world without putting much tough and effort into it. So it's not like we don't already have irresponsible parents. At least gay people really need to work for it. And we are not many enough to create an imbalance. Which is already here anyway, so I'm sorry not sorry I do intend to live the few years I've got the way I want. There will be consequences, but it's not like only my actions are gonna have an impact on mankind. And just like any species, we may not survive for eternity anyway.
Eos
 
Posts: 291
+1s received: 144
Joined: 2 April 2019, 07:30
Country: France (fr)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby rogonandi » 4 July 2021, 04:31

Brenden wrote:What makes your genes particularly special and deserving of being passed on?

There are thousands of orphaned, abandoned, and taken-away children across the United States. Perhaps a gay couple desirous of the experience of children might want to consider adopting one.

I love the idea of this so much! It gives an unfortunate child a fighting chance for love, resources and connections which will improve their chances to become a better functioning member of society! :D
Image
rogonandi
 
Posts: 2128
+1s received: 1410
Joined: 12 May 2016, 10:02
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada (ca)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby poolerboy0077 » 4 July 2021, 07:54

PopTart wrote:Thank goodness our ancestors didn't make that ridiculous choice. Or none of us would be here.

I hear this sentiment expressed a lot by pro-lifers as if it were compelling. A lot of people, once born, have a bias to survive regardless of any human suffering experienced, so it isn’t useful to counter the argument with reference to this. It shifts the question from “is life worth starting” to “is life worth continuing” which is a completely separate question.

PopTart wrote:Castigating people for wanting biological children

Oh jeeze. No one is being castigated for being challenged on a forum. I now get why people get a visceral reaction when they listen to ethical vegans. They can’t bear the thought of being morally judged. If you want to eat bacon or have a baby, you’re free to do so. You also are shielded by the opinions of the majority of the population who agree with your sentiments, so a couple of guys on a forum challenging you doesn’t constitute some oppressive onslaught. But it would be refreshing if people were honest about not having good reasons for many of their acts apart from just satiating their innate impulses.

Bellesedai wrote:Do you judge men who provide semen to lesbian couples who want a baby this hard?

Again, this isn’t about them or you. At the end of the day, you don’t need our approval to go forward with this. That still doesn’t make it justified, though. There’s no deprivation to something that doesn’t exist, but the potential for suffering to any degree is there the moment life is begotten. There’s no point in this other than weird reasons about lineages and other superstitious thinking. And it also passes up the opportunity to raise an orphaned child.
Blow: "Nowadays even Liam can release an album of his screechy vocals and it'll probably go #1..."
Ramzus: I can admit that I'm horny just about 24/7
homomorphism: I used to not think your name was deshay and that Erick was just being racist
Hunter: sometimes I think I was literally born to be a pornstar
User avatar
poolerboy0077
 
Posts: 9777
+1s received: 2706
Joined: 20 December 2012, 21:20
Country: United States (us)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby Brenden » 4 July 2021, 09:38

Bellesedai wrote:Do you judge men who provide semen to lesbian couples who want a baby this hard? If not, why? Certainly they are at least in part operating from the same desire.

Yes, I do. I'm pretty consistent in the application of my ethics.

I have conditions that should be met before I myself would ever even consider bringing another human into existence; namely, fusion energy and cures for aging and cancer.
Disclaimer: All views expressed in my posts are my own and do not reflect the views of this forum except when otherwise stated or this signature is not present.

ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Brenden
Administrator
 
Posts: 8934
+1s received: 3395
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:12
Location: Lanarkshire, Scotland
Country: United States (us)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby pppppp42 » 4 July 2021, 12:30

I was kinda trying to avoid getting into this mess. I have no opinion for you.

There is an almost philosophical gap here that I don’t think can be closed.
You all may be stuck with that stupid saying, “agree to disagree.”

I would love to hear actual first hand accounts of how the system treated gay men who tried to adopt a child.

Most people don’t know I’m bi and never will so I hear the nastiness at full volume that they direct at gay men and gays wanting to adopt makes otherwise tolerant people see red.
Things like people not wanting the kid turned gay by them or even so bad as wondering if “those perverts” are adopting it for use as a sex toy are not uncommon.
The most common one I hear is how cruel it is to put the kid through being ridiculed by other kids for having two gay dads and no mom. Probably true that it will for sure happen at the least.
Basically the view could be summarized as, if you want to be gay that’s your choice but you don’t get to have children.

I’m not sure it would be a hell of a lot different if one of the parents was biological, though I suppose it will give a little more moral leverage against the haters for them having possession of it.
User avatar
pppppp42
 
Posts: 37
+1s received: 13
Joined: 27 June 2021, 18:14
Location: WI/MN
Country: United States (us)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby PopTart » 4 July 2021, 22:25

pozboro wrote:No, but viewing life and birth as "a gift" ARE social constructs.
Perhaps, but you didn't say that.

I would say, that having the view otherwise, that life is meaningless and further, that it is characterised as suffering, is far more detrimental to society at large, than the view point that life is a gift.

I do value life, my life, other peoples lives. I don't deny people the right to get an abortion of they so choose.

But to promote the concept that life is suffering (a fallacy born of other people's misery and negative outlook, that they then project onto the world around them) and thus, conception and procreation are morally wrong. That is, in my estimation, not only objectionable and dangerous, but it is stupidity.

If all sapient human life ended now, then what value comes from any of all human suffering that has existed. None at all. And all our high minded talk, might aswell be for nothing.

The fact is, you care. You care, because life is worth living, else you would throw in the towel, much like everyone else would.

No anti-natalist has ever been able to rationally explain, if life is only suffering and they had no choice, why then do they persist in it, now that the do? Not even Benetar could come up with anything rational on that front.

So...
pozboro wrote:And simply writing off a viewpoint as "stupid" is well, pretty much just that.
Yes, the idea of anti-natalism, is stupid.

pozboro wrote:However, I thought @Brenden's tone a bit harsh, but hey, this is the Internet and when one puts something out there, one has to be prepared for a harsh retort.
She made an offer, her motivations didn't need to be questioned. In such impolite fashion particularly.
poolerboy0077 wrote:
PopTart wrote:Thank goodness our ancestors didn't make that ridiculous choice. Or none of us would be here.

I hear this sentiment expressed a lot by pro-lifers as if it were compelling. A lot of people, once born, have a bias to survive regardless of any human suffering experienced, so it isn’t useful to counter the argument with reference to this. It shifts the question from “is life worth starting” to “is life worth continuing” which is a completely separate question.
I hear the sentiment that life is suffering expressed alot, by myopic cynics as if that were compelling.

So, what your saying, is despite life being so objectionable, so repugnant and unfairly foisted upon people, they can't help but get attached and develop a bias towards the thing they hate and is primarily characterised by suffering?

Surely you can see, how there seems to be a conflict here? If these anti-natalists really believed what they claim to, they wouldn't hesitate to do what needs to be done and end their existence, to save both themselves and those they might inflict themselves upon... suffering.

Yet funnily enough, they go out and author books about it, promote policies and ideas aimed at convincing others that they too are miserable and should avoid introducing new life to the soup of human sorrow. They get very much involved in this thing called life... almost as if, they actually rather enjoy it. Unless they are all self flagellants. In which case they are kinky and dishonest.

poolerboy0077 wrote:
PopTart wrote:Castigating people for wanting biological children

Oh jeeze. No one is being castigated for being challenged on a forum. I now get why people get a visceral reaction when they listen to ethical vegans. They can’t bear the thought of being morally judged. If you want to eat bacon or have a baby, you’re free to do so. You also are shielded by the opinions of the majority of the population who agree with your sentiments, so a couple of guys on a forum challenging you doesn’t constitute some oppressive onslaught.
I'm sorry but Brenden clearly had the intent to judge the op for having the wrong views.

My objection, is more that someone should be allowed to at the least, make an offer, without having to pass some morality test. Why does every action have to be scrutinised?

poolerboy0077 wrote:But it would be refreshing if people were honest about not having good reasons for many of their acts apart from just satiating their innate impulses.
You are shocked that people can be impulsive? That people might not be able to explain their impulses or why they give in to them? Do you go about, declaring why it is you like young boys? I mean, beyond the usual fluff? Let's hear some of your refreshing honesty, why do you fixate on youth so much Pooler?

poolerboy0077 wrote:
Bellesedai wrote:Do you judge men who provide semen to lesbian couples who want a baby this hard?

Again, this isn’t about them or you. At the end of the day, you don’t need our approval to go forward with this. That still doesn’t make it justified, though. There’s no deprivation to something that doesn’t exist, but the potential for suffering to any degree is there the moment life is begotten. There’s no point in this other than weird reasons about lineages and other superstitious thinking. And it also passes up the opportunity to raise an orphaned child.
That's just it pooler, she didn't ask for anyone's approval, it was clear however, that she needed to make a case for it, in the reception she recieved in having made her offer.

That you hold to the viewpoint that anti-natallists, pretty much have the right of it and the introduction of another human being to the world is inevitably net suffering and thus, makes the choice to procreate objectionable, is your thing, you seek to impose upon the OP.

So not only has she been told she needs to seek approval, she has also be prejudged and she has been told that regardless of her reasons for wanting to procreate, she is wrong anyway. Because procreation is bad.

That is what has been said here, between yourself and Brenden.

Brenden wrote:
Bellesedai wrote:Do you judge men who provide semen to lesbian couples who want a baby this hard? If not, why? Certainly they are at least in part operating from the same desire.

Yes, I do. I'm pretty consistent in the application of my ethics.

I have conditions that should be met before I myself would ever even consider bringing another human into existence; namely, fusion energy and cures for aging and cancer.
Again, thank goodness everyone didn't adopt your strict ethical constraints based upon those criteria, in the decade after ww2 Brenden, when it must have seemed like the human race was truly awful. Because no one would ever have been around to figure that shit out.

It's fine if you want to hold that ethical position for yourself Brenden, I can't deny, I think it rather silly, but holding other people to your restrictive ethical standard, that's the kind of behaviour I'd have ascribed to theists of ages past. Not a forward thinking, modern man.

Maybe the problem here Brenden, is that you keep passing judgement on people.
ImageImage
User avatar
PopTart
 
Posts: 3504
+1s received: 2731
Joined: 12 December 2017, 11:15
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby Derek » 5 July 2021, 02:48

Brenden wrote:
Bellesedai wrote:Do you judge men who provide semen to lesbian couples who want a baby this hard? If not, why? Certainly they are at least in part operating from the same desire.

Yes, I do. I'm pretty consistent in the application of my ethics.

I have conditions that should be met before I myself would ever even consider bringing another human into existence; namely, fusion energy and cures for aging and cancer.

If we applied this logic universally, then unless these things were developed in a generation, the human race would come to an end. Is that really the premise? That life shouldn't exist if it's possible to suffer? Where does the metaphysics of a non-existent person's "consent" factor in against an idea that weighty? And if the logic isn't meant to be applied universally, then what distinguishes ethical from unethical procreation?
User avatar
Derek
 
Posts: 6931
+1s received: 2696
Joined: 21 December 2012, 02:12
Country: United States (us)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby poolerboy0077 » 5 July 2021, 18:24

Derek wrote:
Brenden wrote:
Bellesedai wrote:Do you judge men who provide semen to lesbian couples who want a baby this hard? If not, why? Certainly they are at least in part operating from the same desire.

Yes, I do. I'm pretty consistent in the application of my ethics.

I have conditions that should be met before I myself would ever even consider bringing another human into existence; namely, fusion energy and cures for aging and cancer.

If we applied this logic universally, then unless these things were developed in a generation, the human race would come to an end. Is that really the premise? That life shouldn't exist if it's possible to suffer? Where does the metaphysics of a non-existent person's "consent" factor in against an idea that weighty? And if the logic isn't meant to be applied universally, then what distinguishes ethical from unethical procreation?

Humanity be like…

Blow: "Nowadays even Liam can release an album of his screechy vocals and it'll probably go #1..."
Ramzus: I can admit that I'm horny just about 24/7
homomorphism: I used to not think your name was deshay and that Erick was just being racist
Hunter: sometimes I think I was literally born to be a pornstar
User avatar
poolerboy0077
 
Posts: 9777
+1s received: 2706
Joined: 20 December 2012, 21:20
Country: United States (us)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby Severelius » 5 July 2021, 18:45

Brenden wrote:I have conditions that should be met before I myself would ever even consider bringing another human into existence; namely, fusion energy and cures for aging and cancer.

Why the hell would you want to curse your child by bringing them into a world where people are functionally immortal? I wouldn't wish that ceaseless hell on my worst enemies let alone potential future children.
User avatar
Severelius
 
Posts: 4908
+1s received: 1274
Joined: 6 May 2014, 20:49
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby poolerboy0077 » 5 July 2021, 19:39

Severelius wrote:
Brenden wrote:I have conditions that should be met before I myself would ever even consider bringing another human into existence; namely, fusion energy and cures for aging and cancer.

Why the hell would you want to curse your child by bringing them into a world where people are functionally immortal? I wouldn't wish that ceaseless hell on my worst enemies let alone potential future children.

Cures for aging…of those already in existence.
Blow: "Nowadays even Liam can release an album of his screechy vocals and it'll probably go #1..."
Ramzus: I can admit that I'm horny just about 24/7
homomorphism: I used to not think your name was deshay and that Erick was just being racist
Hunter: sometimes I think I was literally born to be a pornstar
User avatar
poolerboy0077
 
Posts: 9777
+1s received: 2706
Joined: 20 December 2012, 21:20
Country: United States (us)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby Brenden » 5 July 2021, 20:20

Derek wrote:
Brenden wrote:
Bellesedai wrote:Do you judge men who provide semen to lesbian couples who want a baby this hard? If not, why? Certainly they are at least in part operating from the same desire.

Yes, I do. I'm pretty consistent in the application of my ethics.

I have conditions that should be met before I myself would ever even consider bringing another human into existence; namely, fusion energy and cures for aging and cancer.

If we applied this logic universally, then unless these things were developed in a generation, the human race would come to an end. Is that really the premise? That life shouldn't exist if it's possible to suffer? Where does the metaphysics of a non-existent person's "consent" factor in against an idea that weighty? And if the logic isn't meant to be applied universally, then what distinguishes ethical from unethical procreation?

So we're supposed to just keep bringing more and more people into existence without their consent and let them suffer aging, loss of loved ones, death and all the other harsh realities of existence (not to mention the non-universal causes of suffering) on the off chance that they might be the ones to solve the problems?

Maybe some concrete existential motivation for our species would actually result in adequate progress. If it's a matter of extinction, just imagine the effort that would be put in to it. No more wasting talent on ultimately trivial pursuits.
Disclaimer: All views expressed in my posts are my own and do not reflect the views of this forum except when otherwise stated or this signature is not present.

ImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Brenden
Administrator
 
Posts: 8934
+1s received: 3395
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:12
Location: Lanarkshire, Scotland
Country: United States (us)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby Marmaduke » 5 July 2021, 21:15

Brenden wrote:
Derek wrote:
Brenden wrote:
Bellesedai wrote:Do you judge men who provide semen to lesbian couples who want a baby this hard? If not, why? Certainly they are at least in part operating from the same desire.

Yes, I do. I'm pretty consistent in the application of my ethics.

I have conditions that should be met before I myself would ever even consider bringing another human into existence; namely, fusion energy and cures for aging and cancer.

If we applied this logic universally, then unless these things were developed in a generation, the human race would come to an end. Is that really the premise? That life shouldn't exist if it's possible to suffer? Where does the metaphysics of a non-existent person's "consent" factor in against an idea that weighty? And if the logic isn't meant to be applied universally, then what distinguishes ethical from unethical procreation?

So we're supposed to just keep bringing more and more people into existence without their consent and let them suffer aging, loss of loved ones, death and all the other harsh realities of existence (not to mention the non-universal causes of suffering) on the off chance that they might be the ones to solve the problems?

Maybe some concrete existential motivation for our species would actually result in adequate progress. If it's a matter of extinction, just imagine the effort that would be put in to it. No more wasting talent on ultimately trivial pursuits.


Do you imagine that if ageing is ‘cured’ that there is any chance whatsoever that the cure will be universally available? A world in which the privileged few can exist as long as they’d like does little to propagate the species. Why do you think ageing will be medically addressed differently to cancer? And that availability of such treatment will not remain a lottery of geography and economics? Are you naive enough to think that immortality won’t be unfathomably expensive? That it wouldn’t have to be for it not to cause the end of the species?

Ageing, harsh or not, is reality. The only reality that humanity is going to know for generations. That children will eventually die is a facile and invalid argument against reproducing. Overpopulation is a totally valid concern, and I can abolsutely see a degree of validity in the argument against having children in a western society on that basis. I’m not sure it’s particularly compelling, but it’s valid. China would seem to be showing us that restricting reproduction as a means of controlling population levels is effective, but economically is not sustainable, but rather a more fundamentally outward-looking and humanist approach to reproduction needs to be adopted by humanity at large and never will be.

However, the statement “bringing people into existence without their consent”? :lol:

If we dip our toes into the fantasy of predetermined creationism that is required for us to seek out consent from a soul before it is pulled into this ethereal realm, yours is the warped perspective of the depressed person, hindered by their own affliction and unable to view the glass as half full. Your advertisement to the queue of souls waiting to be pulled forth into the world is one that seemingly reads that all that lies here for them is suffering and pain, and that’s fundamentally and obviously untrue. Yours is the argument of a child, that life is existential pain. It’s mind-numbingly puerile.

Brenden wrote:What makes your genes particularly special and deserving of being passed on?

There are thousands of orphaned, abandoned, and taken-away children across the United States. Perhaps a gay couple desirous of the experience of children might want to consider adopting one.


Is yours an argument of eugenics? Are we screening the orphans and foster children before making them available for adoption? What of the genetically inferior ones? Or the risks of poor quality control in testing leading to unreliable results? Surely we can’t risk them maturing and one day propagating? We should probably chemically neuter them. Nip this whole cycle in the bud, as it were.

Brenden wrote:
Bellesedai wrote:Sure. Some gay couples will choose adoption. Others want a child that belongs to one or the other of them genetically.

Humans don't belong to other humans.


Humans do too belong to other humans. Until they come of age. They’re called children. That’s why people say things like “That’s John, he’s Mary’s boy” and not “That’s John, the boy for whom Mary is responsible”. Sadly, much like your kidneys, in our tediously regulated western society we’re not allowed to sell these things that are ours for profit. But if I lived in India? I could deffo sell my children into arrange marriages. Lots of profit to be made there. Because they’d be mine.

Brenden wrote:
Bellesedai wrote:Yes there are plenty of children needing adoption or fostering. And yet many people still choose to have children with their own genetics. Do you think gay men should automatically decide to raise children with no genetic relation to them?

Well I don't really think any conscious beings should be brought into existence without their consent. Since it is impossible for them to consent, I believe it is unethical to intentionally create them.


If there is a GFO awards for 2021, and this doesn’t win stupidest post of the year, I’m gonna go Qanon on your ass. The levels upon which this is fucking dense, had it come from anyone else, I’d have taken it as trolling.

Brenden wrote:
Bellesedai wrote:At the end of the day this isn't for everyone. It's for a very specific type of couple. Yes there are many other options. But if you're not interested, maybe just move along instead of judging.

Judging is what I do.


Not terribly well, in this context.

Brenden wrote:
Bellesedai wrote:Do you judge men who provide semen to lesbian couples who want a baby this hard? If not, why? Certainly they are at least in part operating from the same desire.

Yes, I do. I'm pretty consistent in the application of my ethics.

I have conditions that should be met before I myself would ever even consider bringing another human into existence; namely, fusion energy and cures for aging and cancer.

Surely, far more pressingly than fusion energy, we need to invent a means of determining the consent of an as-yet-nonexistent consciousness, presumably from some other dimensional pool of consciousnesses just swimming around together, waiting to get pulled into physical form by the Lord God Almighty?

Let’s not forget the importance of consent, Brenden. Need I remind you;

Brenden wrote:Well I don't really think any conscious beings should be brought into existence without their consent. Since it is impossible for them to consent, I believe it is unethical to intentionally create them.


Rid thyself of these unethical considerations, Brenden. Jesus is watching. From beside the big pond, up in heaven, where all the unborn consciousnesses are swimming around like tadpoles whilst Angelic bureaucrats stand at the bank, administering consent questionnaires drawn up and submitted by prospective parents, inviting individual spirits to hop into a bucket and be transported to manifestation into the physical world.

I want to be clear, and seeing as the word “castigate” has been thrown out and I like that word, I am castigating you. Somewhat for the notion that existence is pain and thus we should shield everyone and anyone from ever having to suffer it but not reproducing, but 90% because you’ve taken the wokeness of our times to a new level by attributing victimhood to foetuses, conceived by shitlord parents who never even asked their consent. :lol:
User avatar
Marmaduke
 
Posts: 8336
+1s received: 3090
Joined: 23 December 2012, 17:56
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby Marmaduke » 5 July 2021, 21:19

User avatar
Marmaduke
 
Posts: 8336
+1s received: 3090
Joined: 23 December 2012, 17:56
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby Derek » 5 July 2021, 22:44

Brenden wrote:So we're supposed to just keep bringing more and more people into existence without their consent and let them suffer aging, loss of loved ones, death and all the other harsh realities of existence (not to mention the non-universal causes of suffering) on the off chance that they might be the ones to solve the problems?

The alternative is extinction. There's nothing ambiguous about that dilemma. The question is: which is worse, suffering or extinction?
User avatar
Derek
 
Posts: 6931
+1s received: 2696
Joined: 21 December 2012, 02:12
Country: United States (us)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby poolerboy0077 » 5 July 2021, 22:56

Derek wrote:The question is: which is worse, suffering or extinction?

Suffering.

I mean, am I missing something?


Let me ask a question myself. If we had the ability to create AI with an ability to suffer, should we remain indifferent as to its creation?
Blow: "Nowadays even Liam can release an album of his screechy vocals and it'll probably go #1..."
Ramzus: I can admit that I'm horny just about 24/7
homomorphism: I used to not think your name was deshay and that Erick was just being racist
Hunter: sometimes I think I was literally born to be a pornstar
User avatar
poolerboy0077
 
Posts: 9777
+1s received: 2706
Joined: 20 December 2012, 21:20
Country: United States (us)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby Derek » 5 July 2021, 23:25

poolerboy0077 wrote:
Derek wrote:The question is: which is worse, suffering or extinction?

Suffering.

I mean, am I missing something?

Are you? I've suffered, but I experience more joy than pain.

If I'm understanding correctly, you'll argue that it's only because of my biological biases that I'm attached to my life in the first place, which is the sort of argument that aims to be unfalsifiable rather than confront the premise at work here. If suffering is intolerably bad and a moral system should seek to eliminate suffering, there's no reason not to consider what "consent" is actually worth when it comes to the question of ending it altogether.

This is like a philosophy someone made up to justify their crush on a school shooter.

poolerboy0077 wrote:Let me ask a question myself. If we had the ability to create AI with an ability to suffer, should we remain indifferent as to its creation?

Say it was an AI that experienced significantly more pleasure than pain, and the pain existed to teach it what behaviors to avoid and was necessary for its continued existence. No, I wouldn't have a problem with that.
User avatar
Derek
 
Posts: 6931
+1s received: 2696
Joined: 21 December 2012, 02:12
Country: United States (us)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby poolerboy0077 » 6 July 2021, 00:24

Derek wrote:Say it was an AI that experienced significantly more pleasure than pain, and the pain existed to teach it what behaviors to avoid and was necessary for its continued existence. No, I wouldn't have a problem with that.

But why be indifferent given the asymmetry that exists with pain and pleasure. The absence of pain is a good thing but the absence of pleasure is neither good nor bad. So why be indifferent to something being willed into existence with that capacity?
Blow: "Nowadays even Liam can release an album of his screechy vocals and it'll probably go #1..."
Ramzus: I can admit that I'm horny just about 24/7
homomorphism: I used to not think your name was deshay and that Erick was just being racist
Hunter: sometimes I think I was literally born to be a pornstar
User avatar
poolerboy0077
 
Posts: 9777
+1s received: 2706
Joined: 20 December 2012, 21:20
Country: United States (us)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby Derek » 6 July 2021, 00:34

The absence of pain isn't a good thing. It's neither good nor bad, like the absence of pleasure. Likewise, pleasure has a positive value, doesn't it?
User avatar
Derek
 
Posts: 6931
+1s received: 2696
Joined: 21 December 2012, 02:12
Country: United States (us)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby poolerboy0077 » 6 July 2021, 03:08

How? Are you reading it as an impersonal claim instead of a claim affecting the potential interests of a person (who either does exist or doesn’t)? The absence of pain is good when judged in terms of the interests of the person who otherwise would have existed. Even though we don’t know who that person would be, we can still consider that the absence of the pain they would have experienced if they existed is good.

In other worse…
Person A exists, presence of pain = bad.
Person A exists, presence of pleasure = good.
Person A doesn’t exist, absence of pain = good.
Person A exists, absence of pleasure = not bad.

The last one is “not bad” rather than “good” because there is no deprivation.

Also, it’s worth mentioning that there is another type of asymmetry relevant to this discussion that should be noted: pleasure is almost always never as pleasurable as we expect and pain is almost always more painful. If you doubt it, just consider the feelings of two animals in which one devours the other.
Blow: "Nowadays even Liam can release an album of his screechy vocals and it'll probably go #1..."
Ramzus: I can admit that I'm horny just about 24/7
homomorphism: I used to not think your name was deshay and that Erick was just being racist
Hunter: sometimes I think I was literally born to be a pornstar
User avatar
poolerboy0077
 
Posts: 9777
+1s received: 2706
Joined: 20 December 2012, 21:20
Country: United States (us)

Re: Looking for a gay couple who want to be parents

Unread postby Derek » 6 July 2021, 05:02

That logic is nonsensical. If a person doesn't exist, that is both the absence of pleasure and the absence of pain. They are the same state of existence and they have the same moral value. The absence of pain is better than the presence of pain the exact same way zero has a higher value than negative one. It's still zero. It's not a good thing that a googolplex worth of imaginary people aren't currently getting hot pokers shoved up their asses. It would be bad if that happened, but it's not good that it's not happening, because it's meaningless.

Person A exists, presence of pain = bad.
Person A exists, presence of pleasure = good.
Person A doesn’t exist, absence of pain = nothing.
Person A exists, absence of pleasure = nothing.

I think that is self-evidently true and overwhelmingly obvious.

Also, it’s worth mentioning that there is another type of asymmetry relevant to this discussion that should be noted: pleasure is almost always never as pleasurable as we expect and pain is almost always more painful. If you doubt it, just consider the feelings of two animals in which one devours the other.

I guess it is asymmetrical if you begin with asymmetrical examples. You're conflating pain with negative utility. The question is whether negative utility and positive utility have equivalent absolute moral value, not whether being eaten alive is worse than eating is good.
User avatar
Derek
 
Posts: 6931
+1s received: 2696
Joined: 21 December 2012, 02:12
Country: United States (us)

PreviousNext

Recently active
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], Jzone, o.o.pickme, Severelius and 81 guests