Isaac Newton never had children. To suggest he didn't have a huge impact on science is ridiculous. Seems like you're just trying to argue. Some people have other goals or interests. (Such as finding the speed of gravity for instance)
What is the meaning of purpose? Yes, living creatures reproduce but humans have also killed off substantial swaths of natural biological imperative. Is the “purpose” of humans to breed themselves into mass extinction? Why? What purpose does that serve?
Well of course? This isn’t a controversial view. But if you want your children to be able to have children then they need to be competitive and so and so forth you suddenly find yourself needing to participate in society effectively.
And then to do that you need to have some sense of contentment and resolution to your curiosities…
sdbs88 | 17 hours ago
Are you seriously just going to any philosophy subreddit and posting your underdeveloped blog? It's not even appropriate to this subreddit, dude.
InADrowse | 17 hours ago
Naturalistic fallacy, appeal to religion and tradition, normative statements... not very convincing.
[OP] JoelXGGGG | 16 hours ago
What is the naturalistic fallacy?
Own_Measurement1242 | 17 hours ago
Off topic
ninjadude93 | 17 hours ago
Nah strongly disagree
InevitableSea2107 | 17 hours ago
Isaac Newton never had children. To suggest he didn't have a huge impact on science is ridiculous. Seems like you're just trying to argue. Some people have other goals or interests. (Such as finding the speed of gravity for instance)
[OP] JoelXGGGG | 16 hours ago
I would argue people who did have children will have a greater total impact at the end of time than Isaac Newton. I could be wrong.
InevitableSea2107 | 16 hours ago
Just think of all of those kids who grow up to study Calculus. Ok bud.
coldlightofday | 17 hours ago
What is the meaning of purpose? Yes, living creatures reproduce but humans have also killed off substantial swaths of natural biological imperative. Is the “purpose” of humans to breed themselves into mass extinction? Why? What purpose does that serve?
[OP] JoelXGGGG | 16 hours ago
Your argument is unclear... you say the more children we have, the more we are guaranteed to go extinct?
BullshyteFactoryTest | 16 hours ago
The purpose of life is process to bear (support) itself (current, of life) where death is process to challenge it (resistance, load, burn).
Purpose of living is not necessarily to "have children", but at least learn to value life over death, or else what is treachery if not so?
Frogeyedpeas | 17 hours ago
Well of course? This isn’t a controversial view. But if you want your children to be able to have children then they need to be competitive and so and so forth you suddenly find yourself needing to participate in society effectively.
And then to do that you need to have some sense of contentment and resolution to your curiosities…
And soon you find yourself studying philosophy.
sdbs88 | 16 hours ago
I would dare say it is a controversial view insofar as it is not a solely acceptable answer. That is, can be AN answer but is not THE answer.
[OP] JoelXGGGG | 16 hours ago
Good point!