Neko the gamer@sh.itjust.works to me_irl@lemmy.world · 2 days agome_irlsh.itjust.worksexternal-linkmessage-square108fedilinkarrow-up11arrow-down10file-text
arrow-up11arrow-down1external-linkme_irlsh.itjust.worksNeko the gamer@sh.itjust.works to me_irl@lemmy.world · 2 days agomessage-square108fedilinkfile-text
minus-squareHalfSalesman@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·18 hours ago How do you reach that conclusion? We’re all just bits of matter, assembled in various shapes and configurations. Because… inert matter doesn’t make decisions… How are you evaluating happiness absent existence? Hell, how are you evaluating happiness, period? As long as you accept the premise that some people are happy and some people are unhappy, I don’t think measuring it for precision matters. Are you arguing a given child would be better off inert? Are blindness, deafness, and paralysis virtues? They wouldn’t be a child if they were never born to begin with.
minus-squareUnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·18 hours ago Because… inert matter doesn’t make decisions… Why is that good? As long as you accept the premise that some people are happy and some people are unhappy, I don’t think measuring it for precision matters. The claim is that people who experience unhappiness shouldn’t exist. Why would I accept a precisionless “unhappy” on these terms? They wouldn’t be a child if they were never born to begin with. They would still exist as something. Children don’t appear ex nihilio. Your argument isn’t for non-existence. It is for non-sentience.
Because… inert matter doesn’t make decisions…
As long as you accept the premise that some people are happy and some people are unhappy, I don’t think measuring it for precision matters.
They wouldn’t be a child if they were never born to begin with.
Why is that good?
The claim is that people who experience unhappiness shouldn’t exist. Why would I accept a precisionless “unhappy” on these terms?
They would still exist as something. Children don’t appear ex nihilio.
Your argument isn’t for non-existence. It is for non-sentience.