Why do people have children?

Originally posted by DrKF
Every day, I try to be a little less Christian.[/b]

Sing it!!

You're a mean one, Mr. Grinch. You've got garlic for your soul!!!

Originally posted by twhitehead
Many of us do have paternal bones, though I don't currently plan on having more than one child. The retirement plan worry applies to first world countries too but in a different way - ie via taxes.

I would have thought it'd only be the likes of whodey who'd be thinking of the issue of taxes (and Al Gore, and "Statism" ) at the moment of conceiving a child.

Originally posted by The Snapper
A couple of questions here:
Having no paternal bones in my body and considering that the future we are creating for the coming generations doesn't look too pretty, I am curious as to why people continue to have children?
I can see that in developing countries, the more children you have, the better your retirement fund, but there doesn't seem to be tha ...[text shortened]... rld adopt a Chinese style one kid policy? Maybe just for a few generations to see how it goes.

Passing on one's genes is the closest they'll ever get to immortality.

Originally posted by FMF
I would have thought it'd only be the likes of whodey who'd be thinking of the issue of taxes (and Al Gore, and "Statism" ) at the moment of conceiving a child.

Actually it is a pretty major concern amongst the older generation in the first world, and thus both politically and socially there may be increased pressure to have more children.
In terms of political decisions such as the one child policy in China, the result is an ageing population. All I am saying is that less children can have negative side effects as well as positive ones.

Originally posted by FMF
I would have thought it'd only be the likes of whodey who'd be thinking of the issue of taxes (and Al Gore, and "Statism" ) at the moment of conceiving a child.

Lol, very funny FMF ! giggling away so i can hardly type.

Originally posted by Palynka
Passing on one's genes is the closest they'll ever get to immortality.

I will tell you one thing !
When my kids leave home ,i will go around to their houses every night and turn all the lights on and leave all the doors open !
See how they like it !! 😠😠😠😠

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
sorry i had to paste this Dr.K for it appears to me that the argument is fundamentally flawed, because the two are incomparable. why? because there are many aspects of animal behaviour which if viewed in human terms would have disastrous consequences.

[b]No single, essential difference separates human beings from other animals.' So began a featu ...[text shortened]... d I say 'free'?

Hiss! Oink! Hee-haw!



Postman Cat, meets the Doves........

Actually (considering answersingenesis is largely composed of semi-literate, half-baked codswallop and brain-dead tripe of the most outrageous order) that's kind of cute. Wrong-headed, but cute.

Consciousness is vastly over-rated in human affairs. We do not choose, in any real sense, to wake up (or, indeed, fall asleep), remember or forget the dreams we have when asleep (or, indeed, remember or forget in general) or even summon to us or abandon our own thoughts.

Even to say that when I get up I choose to get dressed and go to work is to impoverish the meaning of choose. Day-to-day, pre-conscious urges, habits and skills count for more than the reflection of consciousness upon those actions, which is almost always a justification for actions already taken or 'decisions' reached outside of conscious control. The vast majority of a life lived is performed without conscious awareness (without 'thinking'😉, and cannot be made conscious by any amount of self-mastery.

Nearly everything we value has its roots, not in individual choice, but in contingency, habit, predisposition and urges (which are not at all possessions, and may be their contrary) without comparing all available options and 'choosing' one that suits us best. We do not think then do, but do then think.

(The work of the neuro-scientist Benjamin Libet is interesting in this regard: he has shown that the electrical impulse in the brain that initiates an action occurs half a second before we consciously decide to act. He concludes that 'the brain evidently 'decides' to initiate, or, at the very least, prepare to initiate the act before there is any reportable subjective awareness that such a decision has taken place.'😉

Indeed, our consciousness in all likelihood arises from processes that are pre-conscious, making consciousness - including the fantasy of volition - an effect and not at all a cause. The best way to regard consciousness - the one thing that seems to separate men from animals - is this ability to watch ourselves act to comment upon those actions and to justify them to that watching consciousness.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Lol, very funny FMF ! giggling away so i can hardly type.

😠

Originally posted by twhitehead
I have no delusion that I am not an animal, nor do I have the delusion that other animals are incapable of thought (as you seem to). Humans are radically different from other animals - thats what makes us human. There is nothing Christian about it.
You seem to be claiming that we do not choose whether or not to have children as it is some sort of animal ...[text shortened]... Why family planning counseling and birth control pills have such a large impact on family sizes.

If being 'radically different to other animals' is what makes us human, you have said nothing more than that 'being radically different from other animals' is what makes penguins penguins. Would you like to explain what makes the human animal radically different from other animals in any meaningful sense?

The roots of the monad and the fantasy that humans are radically different from all other animals in the sense you seem to me is specifically western and Christian. Its roots can be traced back to Plato, but it is Christianity that stamps that delusion hardest on human culture. Plenty of non-western, non-Christian cultures have regarded man and nature (including animals) to be of one part, without placing the human animal apart from the 'rest' of nature. Are we in nature? Are we of nature? Do we transcend the very thing from which we arise? If so, why and how?

All three of your examples make the assumption that aggregate behaviour indicates the presence of choice, when it is more likely, to my mind, that it indicates the opposite. If one changes the variables in a flock of seagulls or tribe of baboons, birth rates can be affected; it is no different with humans.

Originally posted by DrKF
Actually (considering answersingenesis is largely composed of semi-literate, half-baked codswallop and brain-dead tripe of the most outrageous order) that's kind of cute. Wrong-headed, but cute.

Consciousness is vastly over-rated in human affairs. We do not choose, in any real sense, to wake up (or, indeed, fall asleep), remember or forget the dreams we hav /i] to comment upon those actions and to justify them to that watching consciousness.

yes, quite, it may be overrated, however the fact of the matter is, we have a conscious stream of thought which flows through our minds at any given moment. for example i am conscious of what i am writing to you, you are conscious of the import of those words as you read and assimilate their intent. Not only that, your consciousness allows you to reflect on those words, to evaluate them from current knowledge, of past experiences, to gauge their value or otherwise, to form a refutation, even to make an estimation of the author and to form an opinion about his character. This is truly amazing, and not to be taken for granted i think. Never the less consciousness is only one aspect, we have yet to talk about language, spirituality, appreciation for art and aesthetics, morality and the exercise of the human conscience, the accumulation of and the application of knowledge. 🙂

Originally posted by whodey
😠

hehe, what can i say, it was comic genius!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes, quite, it may be overrated, however the fact of the matter is, we have a conscious stream of thought which flows through our minds at any given moment. for example i am conscious of what i am writing to you, you are conscious of the import of those words as you read and assimilate their intent. Not only that, your consciousness allows you to r ...[text shortened]... d the exercise of the human conscience, the accumulation of and the application of knowledge. 🙂

Curses - this a good one, I think. Debate, I mean 🙂

I have a family visit today (not that I'm in prison; my mother is making her festive visitation is all). But hold those thoughts and I'll get back to you...

Originally posted by DrKF
Indeed, our consciousness in all likelihood arises from processes that are pre-conscious, making consciousness - including the fantasy of volition - an effect and not at all a cause. The best way to regard consciousness - the one thing that seems to separate men from animals - is this ability to watch ourselves act to comment upon those actions and to justify them to that watching consciousness.

That argument begs the question as to what evolutionary purpose consciousness serves. If free will is an illusion and our choices are made by chemical reactions in the brain, I'd expect us to be functional zombies, since we could function as efficiently if we wer.

Originally posted by DrKF
Curses - this a good one, I think. Debate, I mean 🙂

I have a family visit today (not that I'm in prison; my mother is making her festive visitation is all). But hold those thoughts and I'll get back to you...

lol, very funny, sure Dr.K , give my regards to your Mom and all - kind regards Robbie, son of a thousand opening traps, usually set by his opponent! 🙂

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes, quite, it may be overrated, however the fact of the matter is, we have a conscious stream of thought which flows through our minds at any given moment. for example i am conscious of what i am writing to you, you are conscious of the import of those words as you read and assimilate their intent. Not only that, your consciousness allows you to r ...[text shortened]... d the exercise of the human conscience, the accumulation of and the application of knowledge. 🙂

I wasn't saying consciousness isn't real, only that our capacity to observe ourselves act doesn't really count for much, other than as a curiosity. (Quite what evolutionary purpose, if any, is served by this capacity is a matter of debate; it may well be that it is simply a side-effect of a considerably more complex system of communication within the species than is typical.)

Anyone who has applied their consciousness to the act of writing will have been dizzied by the experience: one may be aware that one is writing, but what one writes is more often than not at least partially a 'surprise' to consciousness.

You've asserted that consciousness 'allows you to reflect on those words', but I'm not sure that's true. Reflection on the words is again most likely a pre-conscious exercise and the act of evaluating the words (and of evaluations in general) is dependent, not on individual will and volition, but on predispositions of many types.

I know you're a religious sort (and maybe you've guessed that I'm not 😉), but I actually have more respect for the religious on this matter than supposedly rational humanists, who have just taken the Christian idea that man is unique amongst creatures and continue blindly to assert it, in the face of all the evidence they say they approve of elsewhere pointing to the contrary...