Conversation

This Tweet is from an account that no longer exists. Learn more

May 17, 2020

Nowhere in my argument do any prescriptive claims depend upon the non-existence of humans. If you can show me that a required premise for my argument to go through is something like: "If humans do not exist, then X ought to be done." I'd appreciate it.

This Tweet is from an account that no longer exists. Learn more

John Buck

@WriterJohnBuck

May 17, 2020

So you would still affirm P1, given that humans do exist, yeah?

This Tweet is from an account that no longer exists. Learn more

antoine sugar

@joedan346

May 17, 2020

Premise one doesn't work. It's a matter of personal opinion whether something ought to be done or not. It's purely subjective; arbitrary.

John Buck

@WriterJohnBuck

May 17, 2020

I suppose then it'd have to be the case as well that it's personal opinion that people should not procreate. Premise 1 can work even on a subjectivist meta-ethical framework.

antoine sugar

@joedan346

May 17, 2020

Antinatalism goes like this: If you birth another human, you are imposing suffering and death on that person. That's about it. I don't subscribe to Benatar's asymmetry grid.

John Buck

@WriterJohnBuck

May 17, 2020

That's a description of events, I thought AN was a normative position.

Replying to

and

Yeah, I only deal with facts. "Norms" are subject to change without notice. They are social constructs.

12:40 AM · May 17, 2020Twitter Web App

Replying to

and

Antinatalism is a normative position. I have no idea what you'd mean if you said you're an antinatalist but do not hold to any normative positions. That'd seem (at least to myself) to be a contradiction.