Questionnaire on procreation*

Feel free to answer any or some of the following






What do you say to a child who asks you why he is on earth?


You did not exist before being generated by your parents. Would it have been bad had your parents not had children?


Apart from the question of whether you think it is important that just you have been conceived: Is the existence of human beings in general important to you?


Ought human beings to exist irrespective of the conditions under which they exist?


If no one procreated as from today, there would hardly be any humans on earth in some 100 years from now. No one to suffer from diseases, in famines and from natural catastrophes or on the death bed.

If you are in favour of humans being here in 200 years from now: how would you justify this in the face of the evils mentioned above?


How far into the future does your interest in humanity’s continued existence stretch?


Do you hold that the happiness which some people experience compensates for the suffering many other people go through?


Do you believe that the suffering somebody experiences now is compensated for by the happiness that he experienced in the past or might experience in the future?


Our freedom always includes the freedom to do evil as well. Do you think it is an integral part of our dignity to be able to harm someone and liable of being harmed at any time?


Is it not so that the generation of human beings is immoral as nobody can guarantee them a humane life and death free from severe suffering?


The lamentation „It would have been better not to have been born“ is almost as old as morality.

Should you not favour the existence of people 200 years from now – until which point in time (if at all) was procreation justifiable:

– People never ought to have existed.

– Until the First Worldwar and Armeniocide.

– Until the Judeocide

– Until the invention of the atomic bomb.

– Until the Rwandan genocide.

– Other caesura:



Is it not so that procreation implies moral complicity with the suffering that ensues?


In a few billion years our sun will have morphed into a red giant rendering impossible the continued existence of living beings on earth. Ought we to wait until we singe or should we phase out before by means of abstention from procreation? If so, how much time before should we phase out?


Would you like to be the creator responsible for this world? If you had not been able to create a world different from the one known to us – would you have refrained from creation for all time, remaining blissfully by yourself?


If you, in the fictitious role as a Maker, had refrained from creating the world, would you not then have to reject our creation of people which is mimicking God?

[ *by Karim Akerma and Guido Kohlbecher]

One thought on “Questionnaire on procreation*

  1. #1. False question. There is no “why”. Existence is subject to causality, but no objective motives.
    #2. There is no objective “bad” either… but I’d be incapable of having any sort of opinion if I didn’t exist in the first place, so the answer would be “no” regardless.
    #3. No… Not that the context was specified, but I can’t imagine any situation in which humans could be deemed “important”.
    #4. Not by my reckoning, no.
    #5. N/A … but do tell me how you’d justify leaving humanity to continue for another 100 years of suffering rather than euthanising everyone now, if suffering is what concerns you. That answer is probably the one you’re looking for.
    #6. Until either it ends or I end… whichever comes first. Not that it is important in the first place, but that is the duration of the current state, whatever it may be.
    #7. Happiness and pain are both impositions. The system provides not only the carrot and the stick, but also the desire for the carrot and fear of the stick. It is entirely self-contained, and utterly meaningless when considered from without.
    #8. See above.
    #9. False. There is no evil, and dignity is irrelevant.
    #10. Morality is just a tool for manipulating the behaviour of a population. There is no such thing as objective morality, and therefore nothing can be declared “immoral” outside of a specific context. Not everyone is a negative utilitarian, y’know… and the universe in general definitely does not give a shit.
    #11. Existence is an imposition. It always was. It will be until it ceases. These questions are getting very repetitive.
    #12. If one believes in such things, perhaps. Subjectivity again.
    #13. I believe “ain’t nobody got time for that” is apt. Drag the moon down. Fun times for all.
    #14. N/A. What does that even mean anyway? I am an agent of consciousness. No such thing was involved in the generation of this planet nor the biodiversity on it. I cannot claim to have an opinion on what “I” would do if it I was a physical process with no capacity for identity nor agency.
    #15. Insufficient data. The rules of the fictitious scenario in question haven’t been sufficiently defined for any sort of answer.

    … Anyhow… what a load of stupid questions.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.