Selfish breeding

[Romy]

By having a child, you're making the population increase because of your personal desire to start a family, which is selfish. By having a child, you are giving up energy, money, and time that could have been spent on yourself for the sake of another person, which is unselfish. Depends on how you want to look at it really. I'd say having a child is neither selfish nor unselfish alone, but the reasons the parent wants the child is what would show us whether it's selfish or not.

 

I'd like to have kids when I'm mature enough and enjoyed life enough as a non-parent. I just like the idea of keeping my blood here on the planet after I die.

 

 

One could argue that you'd (not you specificly) would devote said money, time, and effort out of the (selfish) desire to give your child the best you could. Just thought I'd add that in.

1)

I thought we were talking about the traditional usage of the word "selfish", not how (semantically speaking) every action we do is selfish to a degree. Otherwise I really don't see the point to making this thread revolve around parenting. Couldn't you just start up a thread about how all of our actions are self-serving instead?

 

1) No.... It's simply a known need humans have.

2)

Ehh, I'd say it's more of a desire to have sexual intercourse, the reproduction just being an outcome of it.

 

Now my arse has splinters from all this fence sitting!

 

:???:

 

1) I was talking about the raditional usage of the word. It's selfish, for example, to want your child to have the best (unlike other kids).

 

2) Nope, giving birth is a known biological NEED females have (don't know much about the males here).

[Zierro]

1) I was talking about the raditional usage of the word. It's selfish, for example, to want your child to have the best (unlike other kids).

 

By "traditional" I meant it would be selfish even in the eyes of a person who does not believe every action is self-serving. A person like that isn't going to consider it selfish to give up all of their own direct happiness for the sake of another human being, nor would they consider charity selfish.

 

Everything we do can be considered selfish in one way or another, so the word loses a purpose and cannot be used to distinguish certain scenarios from others accurately. What's the point of the word if everything is going to end up being selfish anyways? It holds so little weight. I understand your point and I agree with it, but you have to realize how pedantic it is.

 

2) Nope, giving birth is a known biological NEED females have (don't know much about the males here).

 

I don't get what you mean here. Can you clarify a little?

[Romy]

1) I was talking about the raditional usage of the word. It's selfish, for example, to want your child to have the best (unlike other kids).

 

By "traditional" I meant it would be selfish even in the eyes of a person who does not believe every action is self-serving. A person like that isn't going to consider it selfish to give up all of their own direct happiness for the sake of another human being, nor would they consider charity selfish.

 

Everything we do can be considered selfish in one way or another, so the word loses a purpose and cannot be used to distinguish certain scenarios from others accurately. What's the point of the word if everything is going to end up being selfish anyways? It holds so little weight. I understand your point and I agree with it, but you have to realize how pedantic it is.

 

2) Nope, giving birth is a known biological NEED females have (don't know much about the males here).

 

I don't get what you mean here. Can you clarify a little?

 

1) But when one wants best for his relatives (especialy kids) that's selfish even by the more accepted usage of the word. If you saw a father clearing his child's way to say... a line to a pool or something, wouldn't you call that selfish?

 

2) Sure. Females (males are here either to a certain extent, or not at all) own a sort of instinct that tells them they should get pregnant, have kids. They CAN bring that urge down or ignore it, but it exists. I think it has something to do with aging as a factor to infertility. Sorry for the vague explenation, I'm no expert, only read about it a little.

[Zierro]

1) But when one wants best for his relatives (especialy kids) that's selfish even by the more accepted usage of the word. If you saw a father clearing his child's way to say... a line to a pool or something, wouldn't you call that selfish?

 

I would disagree (not about the pool example). Parents have to change their whole lifestyle to ensure their child's satisfaction. It might be "selfish" to ensure another's happiness, but I don't think it's selfish in the context of all the sacrifices they make. Generally, when it comes to the traditional usage of the word, I would say it's unselfish to make sacrifices, despite the personal good feeling you get on the inside from doing so.

 

2) Sure. Females (males are here either to a certain extent, or not at all) own a sort of instinct that tells them they should get pregnant, have kids. They CAN bring that urge down or ignore it, but it exists. I think it has something to do with aging as a factor to infertility. Sorry for the vague explenation, I'm no expert, only read about it a little.

 

Okay I see what you mean. I'd probably have to look into biology a little more before I can have an opinion on that.

[Romy]

1) But when one wants best for his relatives (especialy kids) that's selfish even by the more accepted usage of the word. If you saw a father clearing his child's way to say... a line to a pool or something, wouldn't you call that selfish?

 

I would disagree (not about the pool example). Parents have to change their whole lifestyle to ensure their child's satisfaction. It might be "selfish" to ensure another's happiness, but I don't think it's selfish in the context of all the sacrifices they make. Generally, when it comes to the traditional usage of the word, I would say it's unselfish to make sacrifices, despite the personal good feeling you get on the inside from doing so.

 

Let's agree to disagree then...

[soulless]

I think it is normal and not selfish to have one or two kids because this is normal, but I do think it is selfish to have 5-8 kids because this world is already WAY over populated as it is. And just in case someone wants to disagree with me, NO I’m not talking about land to live on... Land does not let the human race live... I'm talking about resources, food and water (mainly water) and the like. Like in Australia we are already WAY, WAY over populated for the kind of place we are living in, I mean right now we have water restrictions because there is not enough water for everyone in Australia. We are already close to watering the front and back yard being illegal, if we are not careful anything outside of drinking water to live will be restricted... But oh well, as the morons say, we are not over populated, and China and other such places do not have a problem, go on and keep having babies until the world is dead...

 

There is not enough room on earth for Humans and the things that keep us and this planet alive like bees and trees... BTW without bees almost every plant and animal on earth would die.

 

 

By having a child, you're making the population increase because of your personal desire to start a family, which is selfish. By having a child, you are giving up energy, money, and time that could have been spent on yourself for the sake of another person, which is unselfish. Depends on how you want to look at it really. I'd say having a child is neither selfish nor unselfish alone, but the reasons the parent wants the child is what would show us whether it's selfish or not.

 

I'd like to have kids when I'm mature enough and enjoyed life enough as a non-parent. I just like the idea of keeping my blood here on the planet after I die.

 

I agree with what you said at the end. Having a child is continuing on your self, so when you die you are not really dyeing because apart of you still lives in your child.

[Byzantus]

It seems somewhat strange to me that you would never want childeren, but it's your live so...

Strange, but certainly not selfish IMO.

[Romy]

It seems somewhat strange to me that you would never want childeren, but it's your live so...

Strange, but certainly not selfish IMO.

 

I'm actualy not sure whether or not I will. It's one of the reasons I created this thread actualy... Currently tilting towards 'no' though.

[SeanyTheSailor]

Sorry if you read this comment, somehow I click to post in a thread and it posts in a different thread this is the second time it has happened. =/

[Zierro]

1) But when one wants best for his relatives (especialy kids) that's selfish even by the more accepted usage of the word. If you saw a father clearing his child's way to say... a line to a pool or something, wouldn't you call that selfish?

 

I would disagree (not about the pool example). Parents have to change their whole lifestyle to ensure their child's satisfaction. It might be "selfish" to ensure another's happiness, but I don't think it's selfish in the context of all the sacrifices they make. Generally, when it comes to the traditional usage of the word, I would say it's unselfish to make sacrifices, despite the personal good feeling you get on the inside from doing so.

 

Let's agree to disagree then...

 

Woo, I'm half a year late, but I get your point now. You're saying that it's selfish because they are your blood - I interpreted it as "it is selfish because it makes you feel good to be a good parent".

 

Couldn't the same be said for any (even traditionally charitable) actions? You chose to donate to this cause (that you personally probably cared for more) instead of that one, therefore your donation was selfish. If we go down this road, everything we do is ultimately selfish and it's pointless to discuss.

 

Also, I'm assuming, by the pool example, that you're talking about having your child use up humanity's resources, space, adding to the population, causing problems for others to deal with, etc. and since you are allowing your child to be born (and, in turn, the ability to suck up resources) this is selfish because those resources could have all went to someone who isn't your blood. But how do you know your child won't be a contributor to humanity? In fact, as unrealistic as it is in truth, a lot of parents do believe their children are capable of making the world a better place and raise them as such, and thus isn't really based on selfishness by the traditional usage. Obviously this is not true for every case though.

 

Selfish is just a funny word for human beings to use. Obviously, any action we do is because we believe it has a desirable effect, and our desire implies our selfishness. To avoid such futility for the term, I think anything that implies at least an ounce of humility or sacrifice (based on the context) could be considered unselfish. But yes, technically speaking, it is still selfish.

[The Observer]

I live in a country where there is a lack of people being born so most of the population increases come from immigration. There is also a lack of people in the workforce considering a massive amount of the baby boomers are starting to retire which makes a higher toll on the taxpayers.

 

I wouldn't say either is selfish because it's a person's choice. I really don't see why anyone should force anyone to do either.

[blakdragon39]

I've at least skimmed all of the posts up until here, and not ONE post sounds in the LEAST maternal. I'm guessing guys have no idea what its like when your body WANTS to have kids. As women get older, you WANT kids. You WANT to care for and nurture children. I don't see that as selfish or selfless or anything like that. It's natural, and what we're meant to do.

[magekillr]

I don't plan on having children, but this attitude could change in the future. I don't think not having children is selfish at all. We're already overpopulated as it is, so I think there's a reasonable argument to be made that you're selfish for having kids at all (it's not one I'd make, but I think it's a reasonable position to have).

 

I don't have a problem with using artificial insemination, as adoptions are probably just as expensive if not even more, but I do question people who can afford either or and they choose artificial insemination rather than adoption. If I do have children, I'll probably choose to adopt, or be a foster care house.

[Althalus]

I think it would be even worse to have kids and not care for them because you weren't ready to have them. If you're not having kids and you and your partner have agreed to not have them then you're not hurting anyone. On the other side, having kids when it's too late/hazardous to have them (e.g. women over the age of 40, or someone with a terminal disease etc). is also very selfish.