/lit/ - Literature

>>20132777
Historical materialism is not strange at all when analysing literal human reproduction. When couples say they want to have a family for the sake of "values", "love", "future" and "happiness", suspicion illuminates that unconsciously or subconsciously at best they are thinking about politics, economics, inheritance, organized religion, small business and profit. Admittedly, this is extremely reductionistic and cynical, but it's the only ground children are had for. Poor countries reproduce at high rates for extra farm labour. Middle-class families have one or two for some extra hands for small business.

Practically nobody is rationally conceived as Kant's end-in-themselves, but only as an instrument. It is materially impossible for the poor. Only a billionaire breeder could breed for fun. Thus the practical theological significance of ex-nihilo and miracles in sincere religion is revealed. Because in relation to Aristotle, ex-nihilo lacks material causes, so to do ideologue-religious parents perform an imagined ex-nihilo of their own in considering reasons for reproduction. Apparently out of nowhere (ex-nihilo), an intrinsic reason to reproduce is contrived, instead of being considered on the material grounds. Because they sincerely believe in ex-nihilo, they can ex-nihilo a reason for their baby instead of consciously grounding it in politics, economics and their selfish desires for companionship.

We're just born for our parents goals and ambitions and religion keeps them from openly admitting this, hence religious birth rates. "Be fruitful and multiply" is a lot less innocent when analysed this way.

>>18151996
Yes

>>18118514
Like ok dude, you don't want to have kids fine. Literally no one is stopping you from getting a vasectomy. But for most people life is still worth living even despite the hardships that they think it's worth it to bring new life to the world.
Watch Bergman's Wild Strawberries.

>>17831489
*pops out another baby in your path*

>>17694249
>>17694311
Antinatalism refutes itself.
It's also openly shilled here on /lit/ to demoralize us cultured intellectuals.

>>17555153
No

>>17510956
Shut up anti-natalist.

Reprodoocers will always win.

Don't care, must reprodOOCE

Don't care, I must REPRODOOCE

>>17000772
I wish I could have kids so much. It hurts.