All of Andaro's Comments + Replies

I would beware the political backlash and retaliation costs from #2. What you are classifying as "ethical flaws" is actually about agenda.

In a representative democracy, government spending is supposed to be allocated according to the best interests of tax payers, voters, and citizens. Of course those are human beings living in the relatively present time with citizenship in the respective country. Trying to game the system so that it starts allocating those resources differently is not fixing an ethical flaw, it's a shift in agenda that does not ... (read more)

Read free stories online. The biggest cost is the effort to find the best 10% among all existing free stories. But those are very much worth reading and you can spend countless hours quite entertained, effectively free of cost.

Yet preventing such cases should not be lexically prior to any other consideration: we should be willing to gamble utopia against extinction at the chance of a single terrible life of 1/TREE(9).

I disagree; it is lexically, deontologically more important not to cause an innocent rape or nc torture victim than to cause any amount of happiness or utopian gain for others; also the number is absurd, terrible lives in the millions are a stochastical inevitability even just on Earth within each generation. Just look at the attempted suicide rates.

Statistical

critique of negative utilitarianism

Except I never argued for Negative Utilitarianism. Misrepresenting the arguments I made as such is a complete strawman.

For example, I don't believe there's a moral reason to prevent people who want pain and consent to it, from having pain.

Neither do I believe that there's a moral reason to prevent suffering for the guilty who have forced it on nonconsenting innocents. You, for example, have actively worked to cause it for a very large number of innocent nc victims, and therefore I do not believe there is a moral reason... (read more)

Nice exercise in goalpost-moving, kbog.

Look dude

Errrr, no.

(This is a long comment. Only the first four paragraphs are in direct response to you. The rest is still true and relevant, but more general. I don't expect a response.)

Childbirth is not an act of self-sacrifice. It never was. There was not even one altruistic childbirth in all of history. It was either involuntary for the female (vast majority) or self-serving (females wanting to have children, to bind a male in commitment, or to get on the good side of the guy who can and will literally burn you alive forever).

I'm not saying there is never any heroism if... (read more)

That's incorrect.

You can't make a thread saying sexual violence is bad because of suicide, and then not allow people to discuss the consent principle as it pertains to suicide.

If you use "lives saved" numbers that imply involuntary survival is good, then you will get commenters pointing out that this violates the consent principle. You are not immune to criticism.

Don't want to discuss suicde? Then don't bring it up.

The other points crossed some inferential distance, but were both relevant and correct. It really is true that most rape currently ha... (read more)

This may sound rude, but I don't believe you.

Of course, if you consented, it would be consensual. The actual torture will be nonconsensual.

You can downvote and ignore all you want. However, this does not change the objective fact that these points are both true and relevant and their consequences inevitable.

Just ask yourself the following questions:

Do you think any of the x-risk reduction advocates would voluntarily go through even one minute of personal torture if it were necessary to prevent civilization from collapsing by 2100?

Do you think it is moral to torture a non-consenting innocent individual to give 1.1 times as much pleasure to third parties?

If you are able to cover some inferentia... (read more)

I see downvotes without arguments.

I don't care about the karma, as it buys me nothing. However, I will point out that this is a sign of epistemic closure and that nothing I wrote was either unkind, untrue or irrelevant from an altruistic point of view.

It is up to you not to cause harm.

I agree with the underlying logic, and I did point out that insofar as these suicide statistics imply additional suffering, hardships, downsides, etc., then they do highlight the importance of preventing rape.

However, framing matters. If you frame suicide in terms of productivity loss, you imply that people owe you existence for the sake of productivity. Even if you don't intend this message, it's at least the possibility of an easily avoidable miscommunication.

The same is true for the "lives saved" calculation, which implies that a high invounta... (read more)

To be clear, I don't think individual antinatalism is much of a solution, because of global replaceability.

However, these crucial considerations are rarely considered by those who openly push for active x-risk reduction.

In comparison, someone who eats meat out of self-interest does not have to donate financial or political capital to factory-farming-maximization efforts. Similary, someone who is individually interested in children - or even in violence, sadism, etc. - does not have to believe that supporting anti-extinction shelters is a moral idea.

There a... (read more)