Welcome to INTJ Forum

This is a community where INTJs can meet others with similar personalities and discuss a wide variety of both serious and casual topics. If you aren't an INTJ, you're welcome to join anyway if you would like to learn more about this personality type or participate in our discussions. Registration is free and will allow you to post messages, see hidden subforums, customize your account and use other features only available to our members.

Ricardo Diaz

Delusional Childless Folk

61 posts in this topic

What's with the delusional anti-children brigade who are wallowing in denial? And bragging about never having children.

The scientific fact of the matter is that reproduction is the purpose of life. If you do not have children, you fail at life. It's biology 101. To think that you are anything more than a piece of meat who was born with the objective of passing on your genes, is delusional.

All of your excuses are nonsense. Don't have enough money, can't stand little brats or don't want to clean diapers- none of it matters. You fail at life if you do not have children and it's unconscionable if your reproductive plumbing isn't defective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Ricardo Diaz said:

The scientific fact of the matter is that reproduction is the purpose of life. If you do not have children, you fail at life. It's biology 101. To think that you are anything more than a piece of meat who was born with the objective of passing on your genes, is delusional.

Hm? I kind of 'get' what you were talking about. I'm in the 'why not have kids when you have the capability to make some?'. But at the same time, nature also gave us the capability to reason, to feel, and to choose. Therefore, nature gives human the ability to decline this function.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ricardo Diaz said:

To think that you are anything more than a piece of meat who was born with the objective of passing on your genes, is delusional.

To think there's an objective and undeniable purpose of life it's delusional. But more important, where are your children?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what happens to the people who can have kids but know they are carriers of something like huntington's? 

Edited by toki
mb, thought it was a pregnancy announcement earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not having kids feels so awesome, let me tell you.  I can do things like advance my career with studying, change jobs, change relationships,  not have to run and do errands for someone else.  No one touches my shit.  I can open up a Blu-Ray drive and not find toast inside.  I don't have to come home and call poison control because my idiot child ate yew berries.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plastic; we were designed by an intelligent being to make plastic. Children serve that purpose in their way but the plastic isn't exactly FOR humans it's for what's coming next. Just stay calm and keep buying products that include plastic and your eternal reward is guaranteed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ricardo Diaz said:

What's with the delusional anti-children brigade who are wallowing in denial? And bragging about never having children.

The scientific fact of the matter is that reproduction is the purpose of life.

If you believe this is even remotely close to a scientific fact then you are clearly the one who is delusional. 

The desire to reproduce is certainly an important part of life, but if the only purpose of life is to create more life then the life you're creating has no real value either.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ischulte said:

If you believe this is even remotely close to a scientific fact then you are clearly the one who is delusional. 

The desire to reproduce is certainly an important part of life, but if the only purpose of life is to create more life then the life you're creating has no real value either.

 

He's not making a scientific statement though. He appears to be making a moral statement that summarizes as "We should do what's best for those molecules in the centers of our cells so they can continue to exist in this world." To which I say: Good for you, if that's what you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Antares said:

He's not making a scientific statement though. He appears to be making a moral statement that summarizes as "We should do what's best for those molecules in the centers of our cells so they can continue to exist in this world." To which I say: Good for you, if that's what you want.

I assume he's being ironic and then laughing at the really smart people who take him way too seriously. What's funnier than outrage at misinterpreted irony??? Maybe I'm just projecting... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, godwantsplastic said:

I assume he's being ironic and then laughing at the really smart people who take him way too seriously. What's funnier than outrage at misinterpreted irony??? Maybe I'm just projecting... 

Ahhh. He might have made a fool of me then. I concede the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Antares said:

Ahhh. He might have made a fool of me then. I concede the point.

I don't think you committed enough to qualify as a fool. He could be sincere and I the fool? Maybe one of his seed took and the fertilized creature wants the baby and is using that argument to coerce him into being a daddy? Maybe he fell in love and the object of his chemical reactions is attempting to shoulder him into parenthood? Ricardo??? Mr Diaz? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Ricardo, is the sex with her really good?  The one you got pregnant, that is...  good luck man.  You are going to fucking need it.  Glad you finally decided to settle down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I passed Biology 101 and don't recall any of this on the syllabus. What school is this at, Ricardo?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ricardo Diaz said:

The scientific fact of the matter is that reproduction is the purpose of life. If you do not have children, you fail at life. It's biology 101. To think that you are anything more than a piece of meat who was born with the objective of passing on your genes, is delusional.

having children is certainly important, but some people also think about a legacy that can last for hundreds or thousands of years. that usually falls in the realm of ideas.

the vast majority of human beings will not be remembered beyond their lifetimes and the children they leave behind really is the most important thing they will have accomplished. a very small minority shape the course of humanity as a whole through the fruits of their minds. for example, newton never had children, but his contributions to math and science and its continuing consequences many centuries later forever changed the way society looks by allowing man to see the underlying structure and greater tame the wild universe around him. it's hard to say that someone like newton failed at life just because he didn't have children. in fact, he'll likely be remembered and celebrated long after you and i pass away.

having said that, these objectives are not mutually exclusive however. many people are able to contribute to our common body of knowledge as well as procreate. i guess they must've moved on to biology 201 as well as taken philosophy 101.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ricardo Diaz said:

What's with the delusional anti-children brigade who are wallowing in denial? And bragging about never having children.

The scientific fact of the matter is that reproduction is the purpose of life. If you do not have children, you fail at life. It's biology 101. To think that you are anything more than a piece of meat who was born with the objective of passing on your genes, is delusional.

All of your excuses are nonsense. Don't have enough money, can't stand little brats or don't want to clean diapers- none of it matters. You fail at life if you do not have children and it's unconscionable if your reproductive plumbing isn't defective.

Hmm... this was the almost exact idea (that I tought I understood) which made me suicidal as a child. Now that would have been a bit more acute failing at life I guess.

Realising there is no reason, aim or goal and letting the whole notion of it go is liberating. :) I can make one a less controll freak, perfectionist parent too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bees reproduce by having a single fertile bee that is called also queen bee. She lays eggs for the hive and the hive survives. I suppose we dont need all that many mothers, but rather quality children so then it would be reasonable to fertilize some mothers while others take care of her offsrpings. She could have like 20 children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do understand what you're saying. I remember reading an obituary for a woman youngish enough to have died "too early" or "young" 36-45 age range. She had multiple advanced degrees. But no children. The family listed in her obituary was just her parents. Which brings me to my next point. If the point of life is reproduction as you say, having what specific number of kids qualifies with your claim? 1? 5? 10? 20? You can have one to several kids and end up with zero grandkids. Or you can have a child just under the buzzer at an older age and not live to see any possible grandkids or even ensure that your kid is safe and has a good life if you're not young enough to remain healthy and alive long enough to see them to adulthood. 

My urge to have children was sufficient enough to have kids (and I had the desire pretty early too). Perhaps, because (as I've mentioned a few times in the sapio threads), I do actually get aroused by reading and intellectual pursuit. If I didn't have that trigger, it's quite possible I'd get lost in ideas and too busy to seek out a partner. Which brings me to my next point Newtown was celibate or even a virgin. If you get so consumed in intellectual pursuit, it'd be hard to notice what you're missing. Better to forgo procreation for big-ass pursuits than forgo it for a over-inflated career at a job that you could be fired from at a company that might not even exist in two decades. Go big or go home. For many humans, a balance or blend of both serves multi purposes. I might not be smart enough to win a Nobel prize, but I easily might have given birth to someone who is. But I wouldn't forgo having kids for a mediocre career.

 

(Added: I should add that i enjoy spending lots of time with my kids and am genuinely fascinated as they discover things for the first time. Pretty sure that joy would qualify me as stupid according to most childfree folks.)

Edited by oliverose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Ricardo Diaz said:

The scientific fact of the matter is that reproduction is the purpose of life. If you do not have children, you fail at life. It's biology 101. 

Sure, if you are a bacteria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ricardo Diaz said:

What's with the delusional anti-children brigade who are wallowing in denial? And bragging about never having children.

The scientific fact of the matter is that reproduction is the purpose of life. If you do not have children, you fail at life. It's biology 101. To think that you are anything more than a piece of meat who was born with the objective of passing on your genes, is delusional.

All of your excuses are nonsense. Don't have enough money, can't stand little brats or don't want to clean diapers- none of it matters. You fail at life if you do not have children and it's unconscionable if your reproductive plumbing isn't defective.

I'm a proud father of 2, and I frequently advocate for more tolerance towards children and parents. Because the attitudes in the western world are why we need to import immigrants, nowadays.

That said, your reasoning is overly simplified, to the point of being erroneous. First of all, we are social animals, and although all of us are equipped to reproduce, we don't "fail at life" just because we aren't directly creating the next generation personally. Scientists found that after many children, late siblings down the line will often be focused on nurturing, be less virile, and possibly more likely to be gay. This because the family is more likely to need carers a lot more than breeders.

INTJs aren't particularly inclined towards children, and although I feel they must still develop basic patience in public, I won't write off anybody who doesn't want to procreate in the fashion you do.

Now, if they're just having sex for fun, there are other concerns: women's fertile age is shorter than men's, so even consenting adults can be wasting years of a woman's life. So when she finally does come around, the children born are less healthy, the mother has less energy, and the overall quality of the parent/childhood experience diminishes. This is the result of a society with masculine values and the accompanying obsession with sex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ricardo Diaz said:

What's with the delusional anti-children brigade who are wallowing in denial? And bragging about never having children.

The scientific fact of the matter is that reproduction is the purpose of life. If you do not have children, you fail at life. It's biology 101. To think that you are anything more than a piece of meat who was born with the objective of passing on your genes, is delusional.

All of your excuses are nonsense. Don't have enough money, can't stand little brats or don't want to clean diapers- none of it matters. You fail at life if you do not have children and it's unconscionable if your reproductive plumbing isn't defective.

If that were the case wouldn't you have impregnated all of the hookers you slept with?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Ricardo Diaz said:

 purpose of life ... biology

Using these two terms together means you really don't understand the second term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Biology has no purpose. It is blind. Even though, not having children is my way of having a pseudo-meaning: the denial of my programmation. A senseless rebellion against the laws of nature. Why obey?

Edited by Genotype

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I happen to agree with OP, although I'm not altogether happy or proud about it. Having what amounts to an extension of yourself is an incredibly wonderful experience, which I look forward to repeating at least a couple more times. What dampens this dream, is that children are valued much to highly within Western societies, and I can't get on board with it. Children come attached with hopes and dreams and wants, which the parent is hugely responsible for financially, psychologically and emotionally. Children also come with a woman, and with her come another set of hopes, dreams, and lofty expectations that you are the one responsible for her happiness. I have already come to terms with the fact that I will more than likely only have one illegitimate child per woman per lifetime, making me in effect a serial baby momma mover inner, however crass that may seem. I figure I can still be an active father without all of the other stuff, as children only need your time, love and basic resources to become healthy adults.

Edited by Duke City Man
Add text

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure the rest of the world has already taken care of reproduction for me, considering we have more people on the planet than we can even handle, and it's just getting worse. 

In my mind it would be delusional for someone to assume that they NEED to pass on their genetics even though there are plenty of children that need to be adopted, and that them adding to the pile of unnecessary people on the planet will only add to the harm that we've done already. 

 
 
...... added to this post 18 minutes later:
 
4 hours ago, MissKat said:

If that were the case wouldn't you have impregnated all of the hookers you slept with?

:shocked:

:handshake:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now