so....Not having children=Selfish?

[ElPatron]

Sustain its own? Okay yeah, I'm pretty sure you're just racist.

Then let me play the "some of my friends are black" card. It's supper effective against the "race card" because unlike other people who use it I do have black friends.

And in the end we still have wolves in the region.

But at what cost? The extinction of a breed of wolves.

Go call National Geographic and tell them to stop giving air time to people trying to save species because we should just let them die.

Also, if my hypothetical situation as real, the pink wolves would destroy the region because of sheer number. They would start attacking cattle after the food disappeared and then start killing each other.

Which does sound quite a bit like what humans do, although we can still feed communities with 8 kids per couple while people fight for water

Australia, are you trying to say that other ethnicities breed faster inherently? If not then that's a no go.

Damn it, you woke up with your feet outside your bed.

If you see racism everywhere, I think you have a case of "white guilt".

As for the second part, that's cultural. Having kids to fight for votes is ridiculous though.

Yet it's a serious concern in France.[/quote]Culture is. Maybe.[/quote]

Not so much the culture aspect, but more like the "Holy shit the Muslim community will outnumber us and turn France into an Arab state".

And then the destruction of the French culture. I sincerely never liked the French but not even then deserve their culture to vanish.

If you don't have anything against native culture being destroyed by "aliens" don't cry next time uneducated Americans burn Korans in Arab countries. They are only spreading their DEMOCRACY! 'MURRICA, FUCK YEAH!

 

[ShadowStar42]

Sustain its own? Okay yeah, I'm pretty sure you're just racist.

Then let me play the "some of my friends are black" card. It's supper effective against the "race card" because unlike other people who use it I do have black friends.

You do realize that only racists think that this a defense. You can in fact be racist AND have friends of a different race.

 

[ElPatron]

Sustain its own? Okay yeah, I'm pretty sure you're just racist.

Then let me play the "some of my friends are black" card. It's supper effective against the "race card" because unlike other people who use it I do have black friends.

You do realize that only racists think that this a defense. You can in fact be racist AND have friends of a different race.

And yet to make my point I asked him how would he feel if I started phasing out black people from their native homes.

Like I said, every race has their right to live. Therefore why are we okay with Caucasians going extinct to please other races?

Also, learn what *hypothetical* means. You quoted my post, that said "then let me play" which obviously means I am not literally supporting that activity. I am just trying to point out how stupid it is to play certain cards.

Playing the race card as an argument only shows ignorance. I could say your great great great grandfather used to bully my great great great grandfather and therefore you owe me. That's exactly what playing the race card is. "My ancestors were slaves, now write me a check."

It only leads to "white-guilt" and more racism.

Playing "cards" is the most useless argument ever.


See how Mike used the "Jew" card? "Oh, my people went trough a lot too!"

It completely lacks any sense of logic. Me having black friends has absolutely no relation to my belief that we should conserve races no matter what happens.

I just hate people that see racism everywhere because you just happen to think that races can co-exist peacefully until there is a struggle to become "the majority".

Pretty much every American city that changed minorities into majorities suffered a lot. But we are too dumb to learn from History.

 

[Phoenixlight]

It's not selfish at all, it's great. There are too many people on this world, reducing the birthrate is a good idea.

 

[cameron112497]

ElPatron, If a culture dies out because no one wants to practice it. Is it even worth keeping? hell no.

Why should you force (or guilt trip) things on people in order to fufil your perception of "race" and "culture"

Honestly,your dividing of people into races and ethnicities disgusts me. Why should anyone care if caucasians go extinct? Your only reason is basicly "oh no, no more white people!" Which sounds kinda racist, and you are the textbook definition of racism stop denying it.



1.
a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2.
a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3.
hatred or intolerance of another race or other races

specificaly the first one. You seem to beleive that inherit differences among the various human races (or ethnicities) need to be preserved. Even if that means hurting people of other races and restricting the free will of people. SO basicly racial purity and other crap... you know, that sounds like enough of an excuse to damn goodwin's law. This is the shit hitler said, he was raving on the things your talking about. Except he was talking about Germany.

Don't beleive me? He talked about racial purity and preserving the master race's culture.

How can you possibly beleive you are not racist?

 

[Gilhelmi]

snip

I would not say "not having children is selfish". But instead I would say "Not raising any children is selfish". Here is the difference. The children do not have to be your children. I believe it is everyone's duty, who can care for and provide for, to raise a child. Even if that child is an orphan, or abandoned by the parents.

I was a member of a Fraternal organization call 'Odd Fellows' (I.O.O.F.). Our oath says "...To educate the Orphan..." I can not bore you with the rest. (secret organization and all, lol. Who am I kidding? They have not been truly secret for 50 years.)

Anyway, if I do not have a wife by age 40, I am just going to adopt a 6 month old child and raise it as my own. Or, if my brother has a large family, then I will help him raise his family.

It takes a village to raise a child.

FLT

 

[Mikeyfell]

But people get smarter as time goes on. If a person from the year 1900 who was considered to have average intelligence were to take a modern-day IQ test, they be considered mildly retarded by today's standards. Besides, just think about it--if it really worked like it did in Idiocracy, then how has our society come so far since, say, the Middle Ages?

Not that it means you're obligated to have kids. The whole "people are getting dumber!" thing just really irritates me.

I think you're confusing "There are smarter people today" with "People today are smarter"
Nobody back then was half as smart as Stephen Hawking, but how many people today are half that smart? You may be extremely knowledgeable about a lot of things but you have to realize that somebody hundreds of years ago came up with all of those things.

I think we're past the tipping point for intelligence, meaning that our resources have out stripped our need to think.
A fictional character from a videogame said it best.

All scientific advancement due to intelligence overcoming, compensating for limitations. Can't carry a load, so invent wheel. Can't catch food, so invent spear. Limitations. No limitations, no advancement. No advancement, culture stagnates.

People don't need to think for them selves any more because there's a shortcut for pretty much anything you'd need to do. Modern infrastructure means everything is too convenient, and with convenience people get lazy. And lazy people have no intensive to innovate.


I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that in 30 years the only notable scientific advancement is that the phones will be smaller.

 

[OuroborosChoked]

I know I'm late to this party, so I'll just throw this in and move on:

HAVING kids is selfish when there are already SEVEN BILLION people on this planet and our resource needs increase exponentially every generation.

Stop reproducing, people. Not even kidding.

 

[Adventurer2626]

I'm gonna go with no, not really. If anything you're taking one for the team. We've got too many mouths to feed as is (though we do actually need some people to reproduce, just not all and I'm not qualified to choose who).

 

[Flight]

Absolutely not. People who don't want children (which, for the record, includes me) are doing the right thing by abstaining from having them. It would be awful for all parties involved if they had children just because they were "supposed" to, and that would surely be an incredibly unhealthy relationship.

 

[oktalist]

have you or somone you know ever encountered this kind of attitude?

No, I have only encountered the attitude that having a kid is selfish because there's already too much population growth and with the inevitable collapse of civilisation their life would not be great anyway.

 

[Zayle79]

But people get smarter as time goes on. If a person from the year 1900 who was considered to have average intelligence were to take a modern-day IQ test, they be considered mildly retarded by today's standards. Besides, just think about it--if it really worked like it did in Idiocracy, then how has our society come so far since, say, the Middle Ages?

Not that it means you're obligated to have kids. The whole "people are getting dumber!" thing just really irritates me.

I think you're confusing "There are smarter people today" with "People today are smarter"
Nobody back then was half as smart as Stephen Hawking, but how many people today are half that smart? You may be extremely knowledgeable about a lot of things but you have to realize that somebody hundreds of years ago came up with all of those things.

I think we're past the tipping point for intelligence, meaning that our resources have out stripped our need to think.
A fictional character from a videogame said it best.

All scientific advancement due to intelligence overcoming, compensating for limitations. Can't carry a load, so invent wheel. Can't catch food, so invent spear. Limitations. No limitations, no advancement. No advancement, culture stagnates.

People don't need to think for them selves any more because there's a shortcut for pretty much anything you'd need to do. Modern infrastructure means everything is too convenient, and with convenience people get lazy. And lazy people have no intensive to innovate.


I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that in 30 years the only notable scientific advancement is that the phones will be smaller.

There's just no way. People from any time period have no idea where their technology is going. Back when computers were just enormous calculators, do you think people had any idea that they would ever be anything more than that? Scientists did, of course, but even they had no idea what they would eventually turn into in sixty years. I don't know where our technology is going, but cloud computing, quantum computing, commercial space travel, and artificial intelligence are all being worked on right now. The Singularity could happen in the next 30 years.

The IQ thing is a fact, by the way. It's called the Flynn effect--the average IQ goes up about 3 points every decade, meaning average-intelligence people from the 19th Century would be considered mildly retarded today. People in general (not just the occasional geniuses whose scores would barely affect the average) get smarter.

 

[MaxwellEdison]

It's an illogical statement imo. People who say this don't really seem to have reasoning behind it, other than the "You get to live your life w/o caring for someone else, and I think that's selfish because I assume that the responsibilities I've imposed on myself should be imposed on everyone" context that often gets implied by this claim. Kinda makes me think they're just jealous because you don't have to worry about kids.

 

[marfin_]

3.Child rearing is a lifestyle choice, is it selfish of me to not have children because I want to pursue my own goals...rather than have children and be a terrible parent because I dont want to give up everything to raise them?

This is the main reason I don't want kids. Once you have kids, you have to devote HUUUGE amounts of effort to them. And considering I have ADD and aspergers, I might end up passing those genes to any kids I have, making their lives even harder and making it harder to raise them.

I might change my mind someday (assuming I or my partner lands a DAMN good job), but really, I'd prefer not to.

Is it selfish? Maybe. But it's also an attitude that helps prevent overpopulation.

I would have to agree with you. I, however, do not think it is selfish to postpone any child rearing when you are more concerned at the moment about your career, it is just being responsible. It DOES become selfish whenever you have children and decide to put there needs on hold to complete your own goals ( whenever you become a parent I believe that your children's welfare IS your main goal).

 

[marfin_]

But people get smarter as time goes on. If a person from the year 1900 who was considered to have average intelligence were to take a modern-day IQ test, they be considered mildly retarded by today's standards. Besides, just think about it--if it really worked like it did in Idiocracy, then how has our society come so far since, say, the Middle Ages?

Not that it means you're obligated to have kids. The whole "people are getting dumber!" thing just really irritates me.

I think you're confusing "There are smarter people today" with "People today are smarter"
Nobody back then was half as smart as Stephen Hawking, but how many people today are half that smart? You may be extremely knowledgeable about a lot of things but you have to realize that somebody hundreds of years ago came up with all of those things.

I think we're past the tipping point for intelligence, meaning that our resources have out stripped our need to think.
A fictional character from a videogame said it best.

All scientific advancement due to intelligence overcoming, compensating for limitations. Can't carry a load, so invent wheel. Can't catch food, so invent spear. Limitations. No limitations, no advancement. No advancement, culture stagnates.

People don't need to think for them selves any more because there's a shortcut for pretty much anything you'd need to do. Modern infrastructure means everything is too convenient, and with convenience people get lazy. And lazy people have no intensive to innovate.


I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that in 30 years the only notable scientific advancement is that the phones will be smaller.

There's just no way. People from any time period have no idea where their technology is going. Back when computers were just enormous calculators, do you think people had any idea that they would ever be anything more than that? Scientists did, of course, but even they had no idea what they would eventually turn into in sixty years. I don't know where our technology is going, but cloud computing, quantum computing, commercial space travel, and artificial intelligence are all being worked on right now. The Singularity could happen in the next 30 years.

The IQ thing is a fact, by the way. It's called the Flynn effect--the average IQ goes up about 3 points every decade, meaning average-intelligence people from the 19th Century would be considered mildly retarded today. People in general (not just the occasional geniuses whose scores would barely affect the average) get smarter.

It's not that people did not have the ability to be smarter, or that our brains have "evolved" to have a higher capacity for knowledge, but conditions for learning have changed. There are a lot of factors that have changed the Flynn effect (which is starting to fade away). It is best explained by the Multiplicity Hypothesis, which states that several factors contribute to the Flynn effect such as, living condition, the availability of knowledge, nutrition and many others. The Flynn effect itself was even just to explain the rise in test scores among the lower scores, suggesting an increase in overall learning. That can explain why test scores have a higher average than years past, because more people are able to go to school and learn then they were a hundred years ago. Also the rise in scores are not within the crystallized intelligence (intelligence that deals with knowledge and long-term memory), but an increase in fluid intelligence (intelligence that deals with problem solving, logical thinking). Fluid intelligence cannot be taught traditionally, but are absorbed through outside sources.

BTW, your quote from Mass Effect 2 was amazing! Who was it that said that in the game?

 

[ElPatron]

usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

I already made my point. I don't agree with the opinion that Americans should just implement their culture everywhere. "They" hate Americans? Let them hate them. They are a minority and I seriously doubt someone would pull off an Al Qaeda stunt just because "death to America!!!!!"

For fuck's sake, we are living in a double standard. EVERYONE can trample on Caucasians because we are supposed to feel guilty.

RACISM is RACISM. POSITIVE RACISM is still racism. I don't know why being a minority can give you advantages over white people in terms of welfare.

"Oh, so that person is white. They probably are rich anyway, have a better education and his/her ancestors were probably slave owners. Let's give this money to minorities instead."

I don't like that. I like the way I live, minorities rarely cause problems. When you let things go out of control like in London, Baltimore, Detroit, etc multiculturalism becomes "hate the white"-ism.

What the fuck are you smoking? That's a terrible defense and I pulled no 'race card'. What is it with racists and bringing up 'race cards' when no one has said anything of the sort except for them.

Only real racists pull off race cards.

Therefore,

White guilt when I'm not white? Lol. Racist say the most hilarious things when trying to dismiss people who notice their racism.

I am afraid everything in bold is a "race card".

So far you have been calling me a racist for believing that Caucasians should just have more kids so that we don't become too old like the Japanese.

And on top of that, you used your own race to make me feel guilty about it.

Did you not watch the movie I posted? Mike Wallace tried to steer the argument away by saying that he was Jewish and that people from his ethnic group were comparable to black people. Race card. You tried to steer the argument into racism by calling me racist several times when I made several mentions to the fact that I don't want other ethnic groups to disappear. Race card.

What is it with racists and bringing up 'race cards' when no one has said anything of the sort except for them.

Shuffle your deck and we won't have this problem. Because so far all you have done was creating racism where it is not present. That is racist.

At least you people aren't considering having kids, we don't need more children indoctrinated by their parents to think "whitey" is coming after them to purify his race or something.

 

[Mikeyfell]

But people get smarter as time goes on. If a person from the year 1900 who was considered to have average intelligence were to take a modern-day IQ test, they be considered mildly retarded by today's standards. Besides, just think about it--if it really worked like it did in Idiocracy, then how has our society come so far since, say, the Middle Ages?

Not that it means you're obligated to have kids. The whole "people are getting dumber!" thing just really irritates me.

I think you're confusing "There are smarter people today" with "People today are smarter"
Nobody back then was half as smart as Stephen Hawking, but how many people today are half that smart? You may be extremely knowledgeable about a lot of things but you have to realize that somebody hundreds of years ago came up with all of those things.

I think we're past the tipping point for intelligence, meaning that our resources have out stripped our need to think.
A fictional character from a videogame said it best.

All scientific advancement due to intelligence overcoming, compensating for limitations. Can't carry a load, so invent wheel. Can't catch food, so invent spear. Limitations. No limitations, no advancement. No advancement, culture stagnates.

People don't need to think for them selves any more because there's a shortcut for pretty much anything you'd need to do. Modern infrastructure means everything is too convenient, and with convenience people get lazy. And lazy people have no intensive to innovate.


I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that in 30 years the only notable scientific advancement is that the phones will be smaller.

There's just no way. People from any time period have no idea where their technology is going. Back when computers were just enormous calculators, do you think people had any idea that they would ever be anything more than that? Scientists did, of course, but even they had no idea what they would eventually turn into in sixty years. I don't know where our technology is going, but cloud computing, quantum computing, commercial space travel, and artificial intelligence are all being worked on right now. The Singularity could happen in the next 30 years.

The IQ thing is a fact, by the way. It's called the Flynn effect--the average IQ goes up about 3 points every decade, meaning average-intelligence people from the 19th Century would be considered mildly retarded today. People in general (not just the occasional geniuses whose scores would barely affect the average) get smarter.

Look at the state of technological advancement today. They made cameras, cell phones, MP3 players, Laptops, etc. and what's the next step? they put them all in the same device. Technology has started moving sideways.

And while the Flynn effect may hold true up to a point I still think that thing I said about the tipping point is also true, that we've either peaked already or we will very shortly. You know the old saying: What goes up must come down.

This kind of stopped being about kids. Hell I might be wrong, but I care about my nonexistent offspring enough to not risk their patience on it.

 

[AngloDoom]

But people get smarter as time goes on. If a person from the year 1900 who was considered to have average intelligence were to take a modern-day IQ test, they be considered mildly retarded by today's standards. Besides, just think about it--if it really worked like it did in Idiocracy, then how has our society come so far since, say, the Middle Ages?

Not that it means you're obligated to have kids. The whole "people are getting dumber!" thing just really irritates me.

I think you're confusing "There are smarter people today" with "People today are smarter"
Nobody back then was half as smart as Stephen Hawking, but how many people today are half that smart? You may be extremely knowledgeable about a lot of things but you have to realize that somebody hundreds of years ago came up with all of those things.

I think we're past the tipping point for intelligence, meaning that our resources have out stripped our need to think.
A fictional character from a videogame said it best.

All scientific advancement due to intelligence overcoming, compensating for limitations. Can't carry a load, so invent wheel. Can't catch food, so invent spear. Limitations. No limitations, no advancement. No advancement, culture stagnates.

People don't need to think for them selves any more because there's a shortcut for pretty much anything you'd need to do. Modern infrastructure means everything is too convenient, and with convenience people get lazy. And lazy people have no intensive to innovate.


I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that in 30 years the only notable scientific advancement is that the phones will be smaller.

There's just no way. People from any time period have no idea where their technology is going. Back when computers were just enormous calculators, do you think people had any idea that they would ever be anything more than that? Scientists did, of course, but even they had no idea what they would eventually turn into in sixty years. I don't know where our technology is going, but cloud computing, quantum computing, commercial space travel, and artificial intelligence are all being worked on right now. The Singularity could happen in the next 30 years.

The IQ thing is a fact, by the way. It's called the Flynn effect--the average IQ goes up about 3 points every decade, meaning average-intelligence people from the 19th Century would be considered mildly retarded today. People in general (not just the occasional geniuses whose scores would barely affect the average) get smarter.

Look at the state of technological advancement today. They made cameras, cell phones, MP3 players, Laptops, etc. and what's the next step? they put them all in the same device. Technology has started moving sideways.

And while the Flynn effect may hold true up to a point I still think that thing I said about the tipping point is also true, that we've either peaked already or we will very shortly. You know the old saying: What goes up must come down.

This kind of stopped being about kids. Hell I might be wrong, but I care about my nonexistent offspring enough to not risk their patience on it.

I don't mean to sound condescending, but do you think it's only this generation of people who've thought this way?

Back in the early 1800's, people started saying man had starts to ascend God and was nearing the point of finally reaching the point of having nothing else to learn. Scientists could "tear aside the veil of nature" and see it's inner-most secrets.

Technology is in no way 'moving sideways' because phones have cameras in them. Cars do fine with radios and televisions in them and we haven't suddenly stopped learning as a result. Technology 'slowing down' is a pattern we see time and time again - often before a big technological upheaval with a quick succession of radical improvements to what we already knew.

If you're worried we're reaching our peak, I wouldn't just yet. I'd go as far as saying you don't have to until the sun explodes.

EDIT --

Totally forgot to address your point about people becoming lazier when it comes to learning, let's try that again =D

I don't know how intelligent people were a hundred years ago - a lot of literature likes to suggest everyone was speaking Greek and Latin for funsies but very few people even had access to that type of education - and some people just love to learn. With every subject in the world, there is bound to be one enthusiast who loves it enough to try and learn it all. Even if we start having less and less of these people proportionately, there will almost certainly be a profit to be made somewhere and the people who aren't 'thinkers' will happily be 'funders' to the people with the initiative to chase what they want, at least in my mind.

I don't know, this is all just my opinion of course. For now, I bet an internet cookie that we'll see some kind of appliance in every household in the next fifty years that didn't exist prior to today. If I'm wrong: cookie for you, Sir.

 

[Zayle79]

But people get smarter as time goes on. If a person from the year 1900 who was considered to have average intelligence were to take a modern-day IQ test, they be considered mildly retarded by today's standards. Besides, just think about it--if it really worked like it did in Idiocracy, then how has our society come so far since, say, the Middle Ages?

Not that it means you're obligated to have kids. The whole "people are getting dumber!" thing just really irritates me.

I think you're confusing "There are smarter people today" with "People today are smarter"
Nobody back then was half as smart as Stephen Hawking, but how many people today are half that smart? You may be extremely knowledgeable about a lot of things but you have to realize that somebody hundreds of years ago came up with all of those things.

I think we're past the tipping point for intelligence, meaning that our resources have out stripped our need to think.
A fictional character from a videogame said it best.

All scientific advancement due to intelligence overcoming, compensating for limitations. Can't carry a load, so invent wheel. Can't catch food, so invent spear. Limitations. No limitations, no advancement. No advancement, culture stagnates.

People don't need to think for them selves any more because there's a shortcut for pretty much anything you'd need to do. Modern infrastructure means everything is too convenient, and with convenience people get lazy. And lazy people have no intensive to innovate.


I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that in 30 years the only notable scientific advancement is that the phones will be smaller.

There's just no way. People from any time period have no idea where their technology is going. Back when computers were just enormous calculators, do you think people had any idea that they would ever be anything more than that? Scientists did, of course, but even they had no idea what they would eventually turn into in sixty years. I don't know where our technology is going, but cloud computing, quantum computing, commercial space travel, and artificial intelligence are all being worked on right now. The Singularity could happen in the next 30 years.

The IQ thing is a fact, by the way. It's called the Flynn effect--the average IQ goes up about 3 points every decade, meaning average-intelligence people from the 19th Century would be considered mildly retarded today. People in general (not just the occasional geniuses whose scores would barely affect the average) get smarter.

It's not that people did not have the ability to be smarter, or that our brains have "evolved" to have a higher capacity for knowledge, but conditions for learning have changed. There are a lot of factors that have changed the Flynn effect (which is starting to fade away). It is best explained by the Multiplicity Hypothesis, which states that several factors contribute to the Flynn effect such as, living condition, the availability of knowledge, nutrition and many others. The Flynn effect itself was even just to explain the rise in test scores among the lower scores, suggesting an increase in overall learning. That can explain why test scores have a higher average than years past, because more people are able to go to school and learn then they were a hundred years ago. Also the rise in scores are not within the crystallized intelligence (intelligence that deals with knowledge and long-term memory), but an increase in fluid intelligence (intelligence that deals with problem solving, logical thinking). Fluid intelligence cannot be taught traditionally, but are absorbed through outside sources.

BTW, your quote from Mass Effect 2 was amazing! Who was it that said that in the game?

Okay, I don't know much about IQ scores or the Flynn effect. But people are getting smarter, right? I never said it was because people evolved--I kind of assumed that it was because of how education and society in general has changed--but that's irrelevant. People aren't just getting dumber as time goes on. And, regardless of that, technology hasn't just stopped. That's absurd.

And it was Mordin Solus who said that in ME2.