Anti-natalist here.
I don’t want the universe tiled with paperclips. Not even paperclips that walk and talk and call themselves human. What do the natalists want?
Recognition that the so-called “repugnant conclusion” isn’t repugnant at all. Total utility maximization involves an increase in the population—eventually, not necessarily right now—as most human lives have positive subjective utility most of the time (empirically: few people commit suicide).
Reductio ad absurdum: what would the universe be worth without humans in it to value it? Lesser reductio: what would a beautifully terraformed planet be worth, if humans were present in the universe, but none on that planet?
Additionally, beyond the “material” (“industrial”?) aspect, people derive much of their enjoyment of life from social interactions with other people; it would be remiss not to use this nigh-inexhaustible source of utility. This category just so happens to include, among other things, the joy of being with one’s children.
Anti-natalist here. I don’t want the universe tiled with paperclips. Not even paperclips that walk and talk and call themselves human. What do the natalists want?
Recognition that the so-called “repugnant conclusion” isn’t repugnant at all. Total utility maximization involves an increase in the population—eventually, not necessarily right now—as most human lives have positive subjective utility most of the time (empirically: few people commit suicide).
Reductio ad absurdum: what would the universe be worth without humans in it to value it? Lesser reductio: what would a beautifully terraformed planet be worth, if humans were present in the universe, but none on that planet?
Additionally, beyond the “material” (“industrial”?) aspect, people derive much of their enjoyment of life from social interactions with other people; it would be remiss not to use this nigh-inexhaustible source of utility. This category just so happens to include, among other things, the joy of being with one’s children.