Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

World's dumbest headline.

Posted by yurble 
World's dumbest headline.
June 01, 2021
Spare a thought for the billions of people who will never exist. As world population growth slows, the never-conceived are the ultimate forgotten ones.

I am not even going to read the article, due to the mind-boggling stupidity of that headline. I think if we started to make a list of all the reasons the person who wrote that headline has clearly been lobotomized and had their entire brain replaced with gonads, the length of that list might rival the count of the never-conceived.

  1. Even if every woman of child-bearing age were constantly pregnant, the number of never conceived far outnumber the number of people born. Each ejaculation contains 40-300 million sperm which are never going to touch an egg. The average woman is born with 6 million eggs. Most sperm and most eggs won't be used.
  2. Even if every single sperm and every single egg was used, the number of people who won't exist is still nearly boundless, because you have to calculate every permutation that didn't occur. What if, instead of that egg and that sperm, that egg combined with this sperm?
  3. What about all the people who didn't exist in the past? Their descendants are not existing right now. The number of people who haven't existed can be calculated as the total number of possible permutations in the whole of human DNA, minus the few billion who have existed.
  4. And then you have to define the boundaries between human and other hominids. Are we meant to be sorry about the Neanderthals who didn't exist?
  5. Why should I care who exists? There are about 8 billion people on the planet right now. You are not going to meet most of them. You can get by without meeting a few billion more.
  6. There are more people on the planet now than at any point in history. Should we feel sorry for the people in the past, who could have theoretically only met 1 billion people, except that most of them never traveled far from where they were born and therefore didn't really meet anyone.
  7. Absolutely nobody thinks, "I don't really want children, but I guess I should because of the never-conceived."
  8. How can somebody which doesn't exist be "forgotten"? Oh noes, won't someone please think of all the mythical beasts that were never dreamed up? Everyone knows about the unicorn and the griffin, but what about the "forgotten" snamel, which is part snail, part amoeba, and part elephant, and which I just made up.
  9. It is debatable whether existing is all that great.
  10. Whether you accept anti-natalism or not, I think we can all agree that people who don't exist are in no way suffering through either their non-existence or from being "forgotten" so maybe we can save that sympathy for the living. Pity is not an emotion the non-existing benefit from.

They really are reaching the bottom of the barrel for ways to convince people to breed, aren't they?
Re: World's dumbest headline.
June 02, 2021
Nice list. I'm so there about #10.

Here are the first two paragraphs of the article, emphasis mine:

Quote

A couple decides to have one child instead of two, or none instead of one. This happens all over the world. Billions of children are never conceived. How real is the loss of a life that never began? Is there a right to exist? Is there an ideal size of the world population?

These related questions become more pressing as population growth slows. China’s population is on track to peak before 2025. Population growth in the U.S. this year is likely to be the lowest in history except for one year, 1918.

More pressing? Not to me, because I have some brain cells.

The rest of the article is....well, this tweet gets my vote for best response, because it sums it up nicely:

Quote
crushed it I think
Capitalists so desperate for more people to abuse they've turned to existentialism.

It's mind-boggling the hysteria that happens when there is a hint of the population SLOWING. Not stopping, just SLOWING.
Re: World's dumbest headline.
June 02, 2021
I couldn't stand to even read the article so I appreciate you biting the bullet. I am most curious as to what a right to exist would look like. Who is the victim whose rights are being violated, and how can they receive justice? Wait, let me guess, it's yet another way to blame women and keep them from exercising autonomy. Why wait until women have miscarriages or abortions to prosecute them, let's just criminalize failure to gestate the never-conceived. I can already imagine how willingly incels would pick up that complaint, claiming they have been denied their right to reproduce by women who don't want to have sex with them.

These questions are not even remotely pressing (well, except for the ideal size of the world population, and the answer is far fewer than we have now). Literally nobody but the most unhinged religious people who think there is a soul quota are concerned about people not existing, and even they wouldn't be able to provide any specific details about the supposed individuals not being created. The people who care about the population slowing are purely motivated by the economics of a pyramid scheme, not existential ethics. And, of course, they care not a whit what kind of a miserable existence it will be, thanks to overpopulation, pollution and climate change.

I used to think blasphemy was the most victimless crime ever, but in terms of sheer numbers of absent victims, it can't compare to failing to bring to life the countless trillions of the unconceived.
Re: World's dumbest headline.
June 02, 2021
I did not want to copy the Bloomberg article here because of copyright.

After the opening, the article discusses the work of a dead philosopher named Parfit, who wrested with the concept of ideal world population in a book entitled, Reasons and Persons. The author of the Bloomberg article admits that Parfit didn't delve into the carrying capacity of the planet during the discussion, nor did he discuss abortion. Um, major omission there, but it does not stop the Bloomberg author (and others apparently) from charging on.

The Bloomberg article has a link from the Stanford philosophy department, which appears to be the basis of the Bloomberg article and it goes more in depth on the topic. All I can say is, just WOW. The waste of brain power is staggering. link here

The Stanford site has this example, which is right on target with yurble's objections. Why is the focus always on women? If sperm and ova are so precious, where is focus on men? Why aren't people demanding men treat sperm with reverence when they jack off? Oh, riiiight....

Quote

Parfit was led to the Repugnant Conclusion by his considerations concerning how we ought to act in cases where our decisions have an impact on who will exist in the future. Consider the following two scenarios (see Parfit 1984 chapter 16):

A pregnant mother suffers from an illness which, unless she undergoes a simple treatment, will cause her child to suffer a permanent handicap. If she receives the treatment and is cured her child will be perfectly normal.

A woman suffers from an illness which means that, if she gets pregnant now, her child will suffer from a permanent handicap. If she postpones her pregnancy a few months until she has recovered, her child will be perfectly normal.

What ought the women to do in the two cases? In case (1) the obvious answer is that the mother ought to undergo the treatment since her actual child will thereby get a better life. However, it is problematic to appeal to this kind of reason when we turn to case (2). If the woman postpones her pregnancy, then the child that is brought into existence will not be identical to the child she would have had, had she decided to become pregnant while she was ill (it will not be the same ovum and sperm that meet).

Hence, the alternative for the child brought into existence during the mother’s illness is non-existence, and to claim that it would have been better for this child if the mother had postponed pregnancy is tantamount to claiming that non-existence would have been better for her. Assuming that the child has a life worth living, this seems wrong if not nonsensical

It's not wrong to postpone pregnancy and to avoid birthing a child with a handicap, period.

There are a lot of faulty premises throughout the Stanford site which of course remain unchallenged and unexamined: Breeding automatically makes the world a better place; we have an obligation to bring more people in the world so they will be "happy;" all lives are worth living, and there are certain egg and sperm combinations that are "waiting to be born."

Jayzus jumping Christ, it's just genetic matter. Are we going to start having funerals for all the unused pollen (sperm) in the Spring now? Think of the poor unused tree sperm, wafting around, that will never be real "born trees!" bawling bawling bawling bawling bawling

I'll save my sympathy for people who are already here, people who are dealing with the ramifications of too many people and not enough smarts to stop that. I have even more sympathy for animals (factory farming, etc.) and the species that Homo Sapiens are abusing and wiping out altogether because there are too many of us and we are like Earth cancer.
Re: World's dumbest headline.
June 02, 2021
Quote
bell_flower
there are certain egg and sperm combinations that are "waiting to be born."

By this logic, shouldn't humans spend all their time mating in order to maximise the number of egg and sperm combinations?

And what about animals? Do they have a right to exist if they didn't get born? Humans are so arrogant that they already believe animals don't have the right to exist. They're working hard to make humans the only species populating the planet.
Re: World's dumbest headline.
June 02, 2021
Quote
yurble
They really are reaching the bottom of the barrel for ways to convince people to breed, aren't they?

They are reaching under the barrel and digging six or seven tunnels below that barrel in their efforts to force women into slavery.

+++++++++++++

Passive Aggressive
Master Of Anti-brat
Excuses!
Re: World's dumbest headline.
June 02, 2021
Quote

Hence, the alternative for the child brought into existence during the mother’s illness is non-existence, and to claim that it would have been better for this child if the mother had postponed pregnancy is tantamount to claiming that non-existence would have been better for her. Assuming that the child has a life worth living, this seems wrong if not nonsensical

What is nonsensical is this hierarchy of non-existent people, some of whom have more right to exist than others. When a woman is pregnant, any child she would have conceived during those 9 months obviously isn't. So what is being said is that the sperm and egg that would have met during the woman's illness have more right to exist than the sperm and egg that would have met had the pregnancy been postponed.

There is no logic to this, whatsoever. The number of people who will ever be born are like a drop of water compared to the oceans of the never-conceived, and yet we're supposed to base ethics on a tiny subset of those imaginary people? thinks someone else is crazy
Re: World's dumbest headline.
June 03, 2021
From what I've seen very few people are ecstatically happy about their lives. So why do these pro-breeding idiots always assume new or potential people will be?
.
Re: World's dumbest headline.
June 03, 2021
Quote
ondinette
From what I've seen very few people are ecstatically happy about their lives. So why do these pro-breeding idiots always assume new or potential people will be?
.

The pro-breeding idiots just don't care. This is just verbal runs to cover the fact that they want to control all females.

+++++++++++++

Passive Aggressive
Master Of Anti-brat
Excuses!
Re: World's dumbest headline.
June 03, 2021
If I had my choice I would have never been born. I wish my mother did abort me or drown me in the river when I was a loaf, like she always told me when I was growing up. It would've been better in so many ways.

Why do these assholes always think that life is so wonderful anyways? How can we mourn people who never even FUCKING existed? I will grieve the loss of people who were near and dear to me, but I have no interest in thinking of people who never were.

Can you imagine how fucked up our world would be if all our ancestors fucked and gave birth to everyone they possible could? We probably would've bred ourselves out of existence a LONG time ago, and stupid articles like this one wouldn't exist.
Re: World's dumbest headline.
June 03, 2021
I am so sorry for you mum... my own shit cow told me (shortly before I walked out) that I should have been an abortion. granted, she calmed down in later life but the fucking bitch whore could not figure out WHY I left. I would have been curious though if she had once stated 'I don't want kids' only go get beaten up and down by the fucking pro natalist shitbrains out there. These hare brained moronic baby ass licking natalists are responsible for much of the childhood misery and deaths in my opinion.

two cents ¢¢

CERTIFIED HOSEHEAD!!!

people (especially women) do not give ONE DAMN about what they inflict on children and I defy anyone to prove me wrong

Dysfunctional relationships almost always have a child. The more dysfunctional, the more children.

The selfish wants of adults outweigh the needs of the child.

Some mistakes cannot be fixed, but some mistakes can be 'fixed'.

People who say they sleep like a baby usually don't have one. Leo J. Burke

Adoption agencies have strict criteria (usually). Breeders, whose combined IQ's would barely hit triple digits, have none.
Re: World's dumbest headline.
June 03, 2021
This is coming from a UNIVERSITY!?!?! And I thought West Virginia University was not such a great place to send your kids because of all the partying. Maybe Stanford is a party school now? And to think people are paying $100,000 a year to learn that?
Re: World's dumbest headline.
June 03, 2021
Quote
mr. neptune
This is coming from a UNIVERSITY!?!?! And I thought West Virginia University was not such a great place to send your kids because of all the partying. Maybe Stanford is a party school now? And to think people are paying $100,000 a year to learn that?

It's just an article published by a journal where the editor is at Stanford, so I don't think it necessarily reflects the Stanford philosophy department. The authors are in Sweden and Denmark. The peer reviewers could have been from anywhere.

Having skimmed the article, it appears to summarize the different arguments relating to point posed by Parfit, although there is clear sympathy with Parfit's view since they dismiss the counter-arguments as inadequate. Section 2.4, for example, briefly mentions antinatalism but then also presents a natalist rebuttal. For non-Utilitarians such as myself, there's also section 2.6. I notice that all the authors are men and there is no consideration whatsoever about how the happiness of women might be diminished by being reduced to breeding machines; presumably our happiness is irrelevant because according to natalist Utilitarianism, the happiness of those extra lives will more than compensate.

According to his own model, world happiness has greatly increased since Derek Parfit died in 2017. I'd hate to attribute that to mere correlation.
Re: World's dumbest headline.
June 22, 2021
I agree that the article headline is dumb as hell (didn't bother to RTFA because I want to keep my head intact this morning), but did you see that the official Velveeta account replied?

SPARE A THOUGHT FOR THE BILLIONS OF SHELLS AND CHEESE THAT WILL NEVER GET MADE

dancing
Re: World's dumbest headline.
June 22, 2021
Quote
Ketchup
I agree that the article headline is dumb as hell (didn't bother to RTFA because I want to keep my head intact this morning), but did you see that the official Velveeta account replied?

SPARE A THOUGHT FOR THE BILLIONS OF SHELLS AND CHEESE THAT WILL NEVER GET MADE

dancing

I love it when companies and corporations decide to drop some shade.

+++++++++++++

Passive Aggressive
Master Of Anti-brat
Excuses!
Re: World's dumbest headline.
June 22, 2021
going back to that argument with the pregnant woman, treatment and the impact of quality of life involving some defect.
I believe in the almighty gene. depends on the nature of the defect.

two cents ¢¢

CERTIFIED HOSEHEAD!!!

people (especially women) do not give ONE DAMN about what they inflict on children and I defy anyone to prove me wrong

Dysfunctional relationships almost always have a child. The more dysfunctional, the more children.

The selfish wants of adults outweigh the needs of the child.

Some mistakes cannot be fixed, but some mistakes can be 'fixed'.

People who say they sleep like a baby usually don't have one. Leo J. Burke

Adoption agencies have strict criteria (usually). Breeders, whose combined IQ's would barely hit triple digits, have none.
Re: World's dumbest headline.
June 23, 2021
I am only going to guess that the author of this article was in favor of every war that existed in their lifetime. Why do I think that? Well, I simply noticed a pattern: every pro-liar is pro death penalty. Every extreme breeder is pro-war.

I am yet to see a pro-liar write an article about people who once were but then they were sent off to war. There seems to be no concern for the living, just a concern for those who have not been born.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login