It is curious that while good people go to great lengths to spare their children from suffering, few of them seem to notice that the one (and only) guaranteed way to prevent all the suffering of their children is not to bring those children into existence in the first place.
Interpretation
The quote highlights the paradox of parental instinct to protect children from suffering while ignoring the fact that not having children is a sure way to avoid their suffering.
David Benatar's quote presents a thought-provoking perspective on the nature of existence and suffering. He argues that while many good-hearted individuals go out of their way to shield their children from the hardships and pains of life, they overlook the ultimate solution: the decision not to have children at all. This raises complex ethical questions about procreation and the responsibilities of parents, suggesting that the desire to improve children's lives may be misguided if it ignores the fundamental reality of suffering inherent in life.
In practice
During a discussion on the ethics of parenting, this quote could illustrate the complexities of bringing children into a world with inherent suffering.
Each one of us was harmed by being brought into existence. That harm is not negligible, because the quality of even the best lives is very bad—and considerably worse than most people recognize it to be. Although it is obviously too late to prevent our own existence, it is not too late to prevent the existence of future possible people.
I am not good. I am not virtuous. I am not sympathetic. I am not generous. I am merely and above all a creature of intense passionate feeling. I feel—everything. It is my genius. It burns me like fire.
For 'Tis not in mere death that men die most.
We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society.
All that happens is that the destruction of human beings - unless they're Americans - is called collateral damage.
(on A History of Western Philosophy) I was sometimes accused by reviewers of writing not a true history but a biased account of the events that I arbitrarily chose to write of. But to my mind, a man without a bias cannot write interesting history - if, indeed, such man exists.
For in grief nothing 'stays put.' One keeps on emerging from a phase, but it always recurs. Round and round. _x000D_ Everything repeats. Am I going in circles, or dare I hope I am on a spiral?
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.