Philosophical Vegan Forum

preet wrote: My understanding would be that most of the people who choose not to procreate do so due to:-
1. Too big a responsibility.
2. Loss of ability to pursue other life goals.
3. Being unsure about the possible outcome.
4. Adopting instead(which I think is a commendable deed morally, not so evolutionarily).

Definitely all of the above for me. However, more importantly I consider procreation morally wrong with overpopulation and depletion of limited resources being the most urgent issue in this century. This disadvantage far outweighs any benefit humanity may have from the continuation of my "superior genes."

Please remember that intelligence is not simply based on genetic factors, and intelligent people choosing not to breed does not "set us up" for a future of unintelligent people. There is also no reason to believe that every person who has not had the environmental preparation to show their intelligence does not have that genetic intelligence factor. People who we'd consider of average intelligence have produced brilliant offspring, and vice versa.

Soycrates wrote:Please remember that intelligence is not simply based on genetic factors, and intelligent people choosing not to breed does not "set us up" for a future of unintelligent people. There is also no reason to believe that every person who has not had the environmental preparation to show their intelligence does not have that genetic intelligence factor. People who we'd consider of average intelligence have produced brilliant offspring, and vice versa.

I agree that intelligence is also influenced by environmental factors such as culture, education, society(50% seems accurate), but a genetic contribution no matter how small would be exemplified over sufficient periods of time. If however the sole contributing factor towards decreasing fertility is education(as seems most likely) then as educational homogeneity is achieved in more parts of the world, population would begin to decrease, as is evident from the phenomenon Europe is experiencing(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ageing_of_Europe) and Japan(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aging_of_Japan). The only possible solutions would then be:-
1 To give some incentive for childbirth, this is already being done in some countries, however the effectiveness of such measures is debatable(http://theconversation.com/the-baby-bon ... ep-it-4528).
2. Gradually replace native population with immigrants, although this is a short term solution as under similar conditions even the fertility of immigrants would soon decrease.

In fact population decline is listed as one of the six possible causes for human extinction on Wikipedia. This is ironic, as most of the people today are worried about overpopulation.

preet wrote:
In fact population decline is listed as one of the six possible causes for human extinction on Wikipedia. This is ironic, as most of the people today are worried about overpopulation.

Possible =/= Probable. Just because it's possible for us to go extinct following population decline doesn't mean we don't have a population issue on our hands.

Soycrates wrote:

preet wrote:
In fact population decline is listed as one of the six possible causes for human extinction on Wikipedia. This is ironic, as most of the people today are worried about overpopulation.

Possible =/= Probable. Just because it's possible for us to go extinct following population decline doesn't mean we don't have a population issue on our hands.

Overpopulation is no longer an issue, the growth to 10-11 billion is inevitable now. The unsustainability of such large populations could prove to be an issue, though the earth can support these many people as more efficient technologies are developed and people shift to more energy efficient practices. The scenario of population decline isn't affecting the whole world yet, but it would in the future, after peak population has been reached and the whole world has developed to the point where developed countries are today. It is an issue of concern in both Germany and Japan already.
You might be interested in watching this video explaining overpopulation by Hans Rosling.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UbmG8gtBPM

Overpopulation isn't really the reason for me, because where I live population growth of natives (so minus immigration) is pretty stable. It's mostly the third world that should slow down.

I am pretty sympathetic to the antinatalism idea that coming into existence is most likely going to be a harm. It's always hard to know upfront whether your child is going to reduce more suffering than it increases, but based on probability it doesn't look so good. If you're raising your child compassionately, the odds are of course higher that it's beneficial for the rest of society and the animal kingdom. But on the individual level of your child's well-being, you are doing most certainly more harm than good since life is mostly about suffering. (sorry for the depressive thoughts)

And although this feeling is always in the back of my head, I'm not sure it would be a reason to abstain from procreation when you know you could one day meet a beautiful woman where getting a child is pretty much inevitable. The reason I'm more doubtful about it is a more personal reason. I'm just not that great with dealing with kids, so I'm not sure whether I'm up for the job. But then again, there are people I would consider even less competent, who still have kids.

It's somewhat a shame in my eyes that everybody is allowed to have kids, where it's sometimes so obvious it's going to end wrong for the kid(s). If you can't drive without a license, why is it allowed to raise kids without any competence when it's such a crucial task in life.

Volenta wrote:It's mostly the third world that should slow down.

...What?

I'm not sure it would be a reason to abstain from procreation when you know you could one day meet a beautiful woman where getting a child is pretty much inevitable.

...Again, I've gotta say, What?

Soycrates wrote:...What?

It's not that I take them morally responsible or anything. It's just that the growth is the biggest in developing countries. Countries with better education generally have less children. I hope I didn't offended you by being rather simplistic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... rowth_rate
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... 8UN%29.svg

Soycrates wrote:...Again, I've gotta say, What?

Why do people have kids? It's generally because they love each other, and all the reasons that flows from there. Not sure what your problem with that is, other than it being not a rational but an instinctive and emotional reason based on how things go in life.

Volenta wrote:Why do people have kids?

The most significant reason for overpopulation in third world countries is that people need children to care for them in their old age and help them on the farm/with the shop/etc. However, the child death rate in these countries is very high, so they end up making a lot of children just to be sure some survive. I guess this is not the reason people have kids necessarily, but it is the reason why people have so many children in the third world.

Volenta wrote:It's somewhat a shame in my eyes that everybody is allowed to have kids, where it's sometimes so obvious it's going to end wrong for the kid(s). If you can't drive without a license, why is it allowed to raise kids without any competence when it's such a crucial task in life.

I agree. Parents are too important for a kid to be bad.

miniboes wrote:The most significant reason for overpopulation in third world countries is that people need children to care for them in their old age and help them on the farm/with the shop/etc. However, the child death rate in these countries is very high, so they end up making a lot of children just to be sure some survive. I guess this is not the reason people have kids necessarily, but it is the reason why people have so many children in the third world.

In this case I was talking in my situation, that of the first world.

I understand the situations in the third world are horrible. I didn't intend to say that they could do something about it or are responsible for it. I'm all for making the conditions better in the third world, also to reduce the population growth there.
Edit: by the way don't forget that it's also a problem of birth control