Asklemmy

42434 readers

1558 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

which one do you prefer? having kids or no kids? and why?? (self.asklemmy)

submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by hungrythirstyhorny to c/[email protected]

149 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I don't believe that anyone truly acts independently. We are all products of our environment, of which our ancestors comprise a significant portion. I don't believe in free will.

Your contention regarding inventions is wrong, but irrelevant anyway. I understand that it's nearly impossible to discuss this topic objectively without allowing your personal emotions to bleed into it, so I'll just leave it at that. I've already made my points but you don't seem to understand at all.

significant portions of a population dying during or prior to fertility is the only way that natural selection works. That or the existence of bachelor herds that lead to a very slim minority being the only ones to breed.

And I don't understand evolution? Wow. I think it's possible you may be suffering from a severe case of the Dunning-Kruger effect.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What about my understanding of evolution is incorrect, and how do you see natural selection working in present humans? Very possible that Dunning-Kruger is at play, but we may have to agree to disagree as to where...

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I'll get back to you on that. Seriously, I just don't have time rn but I'll edit this when I have a chance within the next 24 hrs. The second half of your question is particularly difficult to answer.

Ok I just accidentally wiped my entire edit before saving. Fuck that, I'm not writing all that again. God damn it that was such a good response too. Sorry.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I'm sure it was better than Darwin

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

It'd be wasted on you, as my previous insights have been. But yeah, evolution doesn't exist, genetics don't exist, whatever helps you sleep at night buddy.

There's nothing different between me and LeBron James, I'm just not trying hard enough to dunk 😅. If only I made the choice to dunk the basketball, independently of the fact that my ancestors are not particularly tall. But my ancestors are irrelevant, as you've clearly asserted.