Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I have very little of substance to add beyond 'you should really think about it, and do it for your own reasons alone.'

Kids aren't something you owe the world, and Idiocracy is just a movie.




Idiocracy is a joke about a real phenomenon. The outcome will likely be less extreme, but possibly not dissimilar.


That wasn't even the point of the movie

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18489573


I fundamentally disagree with that post. The idea of Idiocracy was clear, but it made an additional statement with what it decided to portray as "stupid". Two things can be true at the same time.


> We live in polarized times, which means that for every ‘Idiocracy is a documentary!’ take that goes around, there’s also a critique that argues that Idiocracy is a celebration of eugenics. Have you thought about that interpretation of it? Well, yeah. I mean I’ve actually read that a couple of times. But to me, I thought the opening made it very clear that whatever side you take, nature and nurture are both covered in that. That guy is clearly not a good father. I mean, there’s a kid with a motorcycle in the front yard, and no one’s paying attention to this. He’s just irresponsibly knocking up different woman, and proud of it. It’s not like he’s a good, upstanding role model for the kid. So I think it’s pretty clear here that, whichever one it is, [nature or nurture], there’s some combination of both. I obviously don’t believe in eugenics. I think you could look at it both ways—you have this couple that’s trying to be so responsible that they end up never having kids. Then there’s another couple who just irresponsibly keeps having them and not raising them right. So, you know, if the other couple adopted the other kids. I’m sure they would probably be better off.

https://www.fastcompany.com/3064328/mike-judge-on-the-10th-a...


The quote gives me the impression that I'm right. My earlier comment: > I agree with your second statement, which is why conscientious people should have kids.


Two statements you made

> because if stupid people have more kids, there will be more stupid people.

You are implying that their kids will necessarily be stupid, which is not so- as per the Mike Judge quote, nurturing and environmental factors, which may included adoptive parents but is far from limited to such, may produce alternate outcomes.

> When some people stop procreating and educating the next generation, the world population does not simply go down. Instead it gets replaced by those who do continue multiplying.

Just because there will be other people who procreate says nothing about the rates in which they do so, that does not guarantee world population will not continue to go down regardless.




Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: