Specifically with the biological imperative argument... I've always felt the opposite effect: being aware that my biology so wants me to have children makes me doubt whatever impulses I may have towards having children as being motivated by what I want, and instead being motivated by an evolutionary adaptation that doesn't take my psychology into account.
[1] https://www.ted.com/talks/dan_gilbert_the_surprising_science...
It's probably not so wise to make decisions based on anthropomorphizing genes. They don't want anything other than to replicate, given that they're replicators and if they didn't they wouldn't continue to exist, that's all there is to it, it's a pretty meaningless affair.
I feel paying more attention to one's cultural legacy probably makes more sense than passing one's hair colour on.
That's not to say that having kids can't be fulfilling because many people get a lot of joy out of raising kids, but having attachment to a bunch of nucleotides seems kinda degrading to be honest
I'm personally mostly indifferent and sometimes want my own, but it's my wife's choice more than mine and she has medical issues that would make pregnancy extremely unpleasant and dangerous.
The world has huge issues, sure, but it's still far better to be alive now than any time in human history. The only way the future could be worse is if this idea becomes mainstream and the prophecy self-fulfilling.
What if automation and outsourcing to cheaper countries leads to a widening income/wealth gap such that you're always scraping by and any hiccup along the way will cause you to have to start depending on very unreliable social safety nets?
I think people earning $20 an hour commuting 2 hours each day to work are capable of doing the calculations of figuring out they will probably never build wealth such that they don't have to worry about sacrificing a vacation if their kid breaks their arm or losing their job because their kid became sick and having no family around to help shoulder the burden.
People's wages didn't stagnate because the idea of a worse future became mainstream, wages stagnated because the supply and demand equation for labor shifted negatively for wage earners. People then started thinking about a worse future once they saw friends and family de railed by unexpected medical expenses, or laid off and never rehired at a comparable wage, etc.
Saying "the only way" the world gets worse is if we don't have children is to ignore the potential for all of those effects to grow worse. It's certainly possible that we may overcome them and human life will continue on its merry way, but it's very unreasonable to ignore all these difficulties and the psychological effects they can have on new parents.... And on new children.
What would your response be to a 9 year old having an existential crisis about the polar bears starving to death because of climate change, and the implications for human civilization, and civilization's apparent apathy towards that? "Don't worry kid, just make sure you have children of your own and everything will work out"?
Speaking as a new parent who did in fact have an existential crisis about this as a child, very very disappointed in both myself and the rest of us.
Should we worry about these things? Absolutely! But the incessant hysteria is counter productive. Us ceasing having children in a form of civilizational suicide is not a solution.
I absolutely agree! I'm not an anti-natalist, nor do I think not having children is necessarily the correct choice, either morally or for these hypothetical childrens' well-being: my point was merely that the issue is more complex than "just have kids and sort the problems out" or "don't have any kids because these problems are impossible to sort out." I apologize if I failed in this, but I was just seeking to highlight the empathy needed to understand the reluctance many (myself included) have around the idea of having kids.
Too often I think those who have reservations about having children are told "Oh just get over it," or "You're being dramatic," which does nothing to address the underlying concerns these would-be parents have, and in fact can just make those concerns worse because they feel like nobody is truly paying attention to those concerns. Which just exacerbates them.
That said, I do fear my kid will live to see something we’ve made apocalyptic movies about. Hell, we all might.
I also think OPs reasoning has more to do with the considerations of inflicting the potentially post-apocalyptic future on those future generations: there is an arguable moral duty to ensure that whatever offspring you have will have a (generally) good life, and that if you aren't reasonably sure of that it's A Bad Thing to have said offspring.
He said the guys kids would be better off if he didn’t have them. And basically said he had them for selfish reasons (kids make your life better)
Seems like you’re the one making leaps, I read what was written
Basically, life is suffering, and from the view of reducing the amount of suffering in the world, it is a good to abstain from bringing more beings into this world to suffer.
Looking back, I am not sure this justification makes any sense, but it was how I thought at the time.
In any case it's moot now because it turns out kids are great fun to have around and generally make life better. Except the car seats, car seats are a pain in the ass.