# I can't get over this way of thinking **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 22, 2013, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667 "2013-06-22T23:12:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Mosier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ea924/32.png) [@Mosier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mosier)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/41 "2013-06-23T02:06:20Z")
> [@lankyBlonde](#): > > Example: Person is born. Person has a disease that causes excruciating amounts of pain, both physical and mental. Person wishes he had never been born. Person realizes his parents dragged him into this and forced existence upon him. What now? Do you know of anyone who fits this description, and has decided to blame his parents for existence? In your original post, you described a lifetime of torture inflicted by a knife wielding maniac. Are you honestly saying that if you were the maniac’s victim, you’d blame your _parents?_ ---
**Author:** ![lankyBlonde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/dc4da7/32.png) [@lankyBlonde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lankyBlonde)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/42 "2013-06-23T02:07:37Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Not in most cases. If the parents abused their child, then they bear part of the blame. If the parents were loving and made good efforts to provide a good home to their child, then no. If someone is violated in any way (attacked, raped, abused, tortured, murdered, etc.), then the blame lies solely with the violator. Let us assume that the parents live in a country where the probability that the child will live a hellish life (poverty, disease, pain, rapists everywhere, etc) is high. Let’s say 50%. Is it immoral for the parent to create the child? Imagine if Hell is real and it’s the worst experience imaginable but people can still create babies there. Isn’t it immoral to force someone to bear that experience? The parent IS responsible in some way because they created the child while knowing that the child CAN technically undergo excruciating amounts of pain. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/43 "2013-06-23T02:08:03Z")
> [@lankyBlonde](#): > > Kind of silly how this board is called “great debates” and yet half the responses aren’t even debates but one sentence ‘smart-ass’ responses with absolutely no rationality to them. At the time you wrote this, “half the responses” was one post, since _all_ the responses were just two posts. > [@](#): > > Care to explain why I’m over thinking? I’d say you’re over-_fretting_, rather than over-thinking, since your line of thought doesn’t really go anywhere. So life is harsh and limited? Thanks for the insight. What, if anything, can you further infer to awe us with? ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/44 "2013-06-23T02:08:16Z")
> [@lankyBlonde](#): > > Man, why is everyone missing the point here. I’m not pulling a stunt, I’m not EVEN REMOTELY DEPRESSED. My life is GOOD in every single way, from my looks to my health to my parents salary to the country I live in to the school I attend. I want to make it CLEAR that I ENJOY LIFE. > > At what point did I say I was complicated? > > Why do you not refute my statement? Even if there are a million people that experience pain far worse than I do, how is that relevant in any way? It’s like a father saying it’s alright to beat his child because there are billions of children who are living in far worse conditions. What??? The purpose of life is to continue. We have children because if we didn’t, there would be no more Human race. We have the right to have children just as every other species has the right to procreate. This is not a moral choice, it is a biological imperative. We cannot determine the fate of our children just as we cannot pre-determine their personality. We can only give them the opportunity to live, and hope for the best. Why do we not refute your statement? I have, in every single post. You’re the one who isn’t listening. ---
**Author:** ![Jragon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Jragon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jragon)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/45 "2013-06-23T02:09:09Z")
> [@Troppus](#): > > After a miserably long recovery from surgery for a birth defect, I pulled this same stunt on my parents. I was 17, taking those college courses which lead many of us to pontificate and and wallow, and my dad said “Oh, shut up. I’m not listening to the same cop-out that every kid goes through when they take their first philosophy or psychology course. Get over yourself.” > > He was right. We all pull this stunt. Including your parents. Everyone wants to think he or she is so complicated, so incredibly unique that no one else could possibly understand them. Problem is, that ain’t true. There are hundreds; thousands… maybe even millions of people who have experienced the very same moment of angst and introspection. That’s why almost no one has any sympathy to share. You aren’t alone, and there are far too many people on this rock who are geniunely suffering to indulge you. Get over yourself. It’s the best lesson you’ll learn before you turn 30. I don’t think everyone pulls this, I think pulling the absolute reverse is just as common. “NOTHING I DO MATTERS. I’M A TINY INSIGNIFICANT SPEC IN AN ENDLESS VOID. WHY SHOULD I GET A JOB WHEN WE’RE ALL GOING TO JUST DIE ANYWAY!?” I **still** suffer from this a little. I know people who have gotten good jobs or into good grad schools because of their silly blogs that nobody reads because it “shows initiative” or whatever. Why don’t I make a blog about cool things I’m interested in? “There’s a billion blogs on this topic, what am I going to say that a million people haven’t already?” While, objectively, that’s true I kind of have figured out that I’m discounting that I can say old things in new ways that people will identify will, or help them understand things in a new way. I mean, 98% of my posts probably won’t do that for anybody, but just because a million billion people have had the same thought doesn’t mean that articulating that thought is worthless. Just focus on the message and don’t delude yourself into thinking your work is unique. I mean, unless you’re talking about your cutting edge doctoral work or prove P=NP or something, then you might get a little bit of a pass. Overall, both viewpoints are rather extreme. While I’d say the “futility” one is perhaps a bit smarter and more nuanced (or maybe that’s hubris since that was **my** particular quirk), they’re both about equally productive and come off equally laughable to people who went through that phase at one point and got over it. ---
**Author:** ![lankyBlonde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/dc4da7/32.png) [@lankyBlonde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lankyBlonde)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/46 "2013-06-23T02:09:33Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Because of the statistics and probabilities. Throwing a child down a chute has a high probability of a bad outcome. Simply having a child does not, and having a child by a loving family with a good home has a higher chance of a happy outcome than a bad one. So who decides what the acceptable odds are to gamble with a child’s life? If the odds of excruciating pain is 50%, is that too high? What about 20%? What about 0.1% What about 0.0000001%? When is it too high and when is it too low? ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/47 "2013-06-23T02:11:05Z")
> [@lankyBlonde](#): > > For instance, should the Negro slaves in the pre civil American War era have just accepted their fate and gotten over it? Should they just think “gee, I’m slaving away for 20 hours a day, am treated like property, and have absolutely no rights while this white man next to me has everything desireable? Gee, everything’s fine and dandy and I love life?” Give me a break. Should we accept slavery and just tell our slaves “these are the cards you’re dealt, accept it, suck it up, and work?” Are you insane? Who precisely do you see as enslaving you? Your parents? Society? > [@](#): > > The topic for debate is: do you have a right to gamble with someone else’s well being?Do you have a right to make someone prone to pain Of course you do. Nobody believes that we are obliged to live our lives in such a way that there can not be even a chance that our action will impinge on any single other person’s well-being. Not only is that insane, it’s impossible. Even you accept this as being true, as evidenced by the fact that you have posted this subject here. You must know that posting this sort of material has the capacity to make people feel depressed or angry. Right? I mean, you’re not so self-absorbed that you didn’t realise that posting material of the sort in your OP has a chance of making at least one reader unhappy. Right? And yet, realising that posting such material has a chance of making at least one reader unhappy, you posted it anyway. Therefore, you took a gamble with the well-being of every single person who reads this thread. Your actions made every single reader of this thread prone to pain. So you clearly accept that you have a right to gamble with someone elses well being? QED. So that resolves the only debate topic in this thrread. Got any more? Maybe something that can;t be irrefutably resolved with a minute’s introspection? > [@](#): > > All I am saying is this- In life, there is colossal amounts of pain that can inflict anybody regardless of how optimistic or loving their parents are. It IS possible. I just don’t understand how people are okay with blindly taking that risk. Because in life, there are colossal amounts of happiness that can inflict anybody regardless of how negative or neglectful their parents are. It IS possible. I just don’t understand how people are okay with blindly taking the risk that a child not experience that. This argument has been put to you by several other posters, and your sole response seems to be that there is more pain than happiness. Well, prove it! The fact that almost nobody ever commits suicide seems to rather refute the idea that a majority of people find non-existence preferable to existence. > [@](#): > > What I have a problem with is gambling with somebody else’s well being, surely you see the difference? But you clearly don’t have any problem at all gambling with somebody else’s well being. You posted material in this thread that you knew had a chance of affecting someone else’s well being. You presumably drive a car, knowing that there is a chance that you could run over a pedestrian. You use a computer, knowing that the carbon emissions your are producing have a chance of drowning a child. You do things constantly that consist of gambling with somebody else’s well being. So don’t expect us to believe that you have some sort of problem with that, when it is utterly inonsistent with your actions. ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/48 "2013-06-23T02:11:15Z")
> [@lankyBlonde](#): > > Imagine if Hell is real and it’s the worst experience imaginable but people can still create babies there. Isn’t it immoral to force someone to bear that experience? Imagine that you didn’t invent impossible situations as a tool of debate and then slam others for not surrendering to your brilliance. Imagine that you actually read other people’s responses as just that - responses; and didn’t outright dismiss them as flippant, snarky or stupid. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/49 "2013-06-23T02:14:03Z")
> [@lankyBlonde](#): > > Let us assume that the parents live in a country where the probability that the child will live a hellish life (poverty, disease, pain, rapists everywhere, etc) is high. Let’s say 50%. Is it immoral for the parent to create the child? In most situations similar to the one you describe, the parents don’t really have much choice in the matter. That’s biology. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/50 "2013-06-23T02:14:11Z")
What if Chemical A was acid glue and Chemical B was Hitler? ---
**Author:** ![lankyBlonde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/dc4da7/32.png) [@lankyBlonde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lankyBlonde)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/51 "2013-06-23T02:15:29Z")
> [@Blake](#): > > Who precisely do you see as enslaving you? Your parents? Society? > > Of course you do. Nobody believes that we are obliged to live our lives in such a way that there can not be even a chance that our action will impinge on any single other person’s well-being. Not only is that insane, it’s impossible. > > Even you accept this as being true, as evidenced by the fact that you have posted this subject here. > > You must know that posting this sort of material has the capacity to make people feel depressed or angry. Right? I mean, you’re not so self-absorbed that you didn’t realise that posting material of the sort in your OP has a chance of making at least one reader unhappy. Right? > > And yet, realising that posting such material has a chance of making at least one reader unhappy, you posted it anyway. > > Therefore, you took a gamble with the well-being of every single person who reads this thread. Your actions made every single reader of this thread prone to pain. > > So you clearly accept that you have a right to gamble with someone elses well being? QED. > > So that resolves the only debate topic in this thrread. > > Got any more? Maybe something that can;t be irrefutably resolved with a minute’s introspection? > > Because in life, there are colossal amounts of happiness that can inflict anybody regardless of how negative or neglectful their parents are. It IS possible. I just don’t understand how people are okay with blindly taking the risk that a child not experience that. > > This argument has been put to you by several other posters, and your sole response seems to be that there is more pain than happiness. Well, prove it! The fact that almost nobody ever commits suicide seems to rather refute the idea that a majority of people find non-existence preferable to existence. > > But you clearly don’t have any problem at all gambling with somebody else’s well being. You posted material in this thread that you knew had a chance of affecting someone else’s well being. You presumably drive a car, knowing that there is a chance that you could run over a pedestrian. You use a computer, knowing that the carbon emissions your are producing have a chance of drowning a child. > > You do things constantly that consist of gambling with somebody else’s well being. So don’t expect us to believe that you have some sort of problem with that, when it is utterly inonsistent with your actions. (1) Pain and pleasure are asymmetrical. They don’t cancel each other out. For instance, take the act of flying over a city and dropping large chunks of expensive rock. Some people will benefit and get rich (+) but others will get maimed and badly hurt (-). The act is thus immoral. We have an obligation to make sure that our actions don’t cause pain. Intent has no place here. (2) This is the ironic part. If I drive a car and horribly injure somebody, I am held responsible. I will be arrested, I will be punished, I will get in trouble for my actions. If I have a child and I take a risk and gamble with his life and he ends up undergoing tons of pain, I don’t get in even a bit of trouble. What’s up with that? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/52 "2013-06-23T02:15:38Z")
> [@lankyBlonde](#): > > So who decides what the acceptable odds are to gamble with a child’s life? If the odds of excruciating pain is 50%, is that too high? What about 20%? What about 0.1% What about 0.0000001%? When is it too high and when is it too low? It’s complicated, and involves a lot of multidimensional calculus. You’ll get the booklet before you or your partner gets pregnant. ---
**Author:** ![Blake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a9a28c/32.png) [@Blake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blake)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/53 "2013-06-23T02:17:04Z")
> [@lankyBlonde](#): > > So who decides what the acceptable odds are to gamble with a child’s life? If the odds of excruciating pain is 50%, is that too high? What about 20%? What about 0.1% What about 0.0000001%? When is it too high and when is it too low? Good question. Why don’t you tell us the answer? You drive a car I assume? Or at least don’t have any philosophical objection to driving one some day? And you do realise that there is a chance, every time that car is driven, that it will strike a child and cause them excruciating pain, kill them, or leave them crippled and in pain for the rest of their life? Right? So how \*did \*you decide what the acceptable odds were to gamble with a child’s life? If the odds of excruciating pain is 50%, was that too high? What about 20%? What about 0.1% What about 0.0000001%? When did it become sufficiently low that you gave yourself permission to drive a car, knowing that there was a probability that it would leave a child in excruciating pain? You presumably have the answer to this question, because you presumably have no problem with driving a car, and you don’t agonise over it the way you agonise over having children. So you must have resolved the question of when the risk of leaving a child in excruciating pain due to a car accident became acceptable. So please, share the answer with us and tell us how you arrived at that answer. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/54 "2013-06-23T02:17:57Z")
> [@lankyBlonde](#): > > (2) This is the ironic part. If I drive a car and horribly injure somebody, I am held responsible. I will be arrested, I will be punished, I will get in trouble for my actions. If I have a child and I take a risk and gamble with his life and he ends up undergoing tons of pain, I don’t get in even a bit of trouble. What’s up with that? No, it’s not ironic. Hurt someone and you’re responsible. Create someone who gets hurt later by someone else? You’re not responsible. It’s not very complicated. Think about it with inanimate objects- suppose you create an intricate and beautiful sculpture. Three months later, while it’s on display at the museum, someone breaks in and vandalizes it. Are you responsible in any way for the damage to the sculpture? No. ---
**Author:** ![Cheshire\_Human](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/5f8ce5/32.png) [@Cheshire\_Human](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cheshire_Human)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/55 "2013-06-23T02:19:01Z")
OP wants to be the next Steven King. OP needs to get over the TL;DR stage and learn to write prose that actually _engages_ the reader. I give the OP 1/10, where the average self-published work rates a 3/10. OP needs to up their game, and post less crappy crap. This review could have been more honest and useful, but the OP was posted in GD, rather than the Pit. ---
**Author:** ![lankyBlonde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/dc4da7/32.png) [@lankyBlonde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lankyBlonde)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/56 "2013-06-23T02:20:45Z")
> [@Blake](#): > > Good question. Why don’t you tell us the answer? > > You drive a car I assume? Or at least don’t have any philosophical objection to driving one some day? > > And you do realise that there is a chance, every time that car is driven, that it will strike a child and cause them excruciating pain, kill them, or leave them crippled and in pain for the rest of their life? Right? > > So how \*did \*you decide what the acceptable odds were to gamble with a child’s life? If the odds of excruciating pain is 50%, was that too high? What about 20%? What about 0.1% What about 0.0000001%? When did it become sufficiently low that you gave yourself permission to drive a car, knowing that there was a probability that it would leave a child in excruciating pain? > > You presumably have the answer to this question, because you presumably have no problem with driving a car, and you don’t agonise over it the way you agonise over having children. > > So you must have resolved the question of when the risk of leaving a child in excruciating pain due to a car accident became acceptable. > > So please, share the answer with us and tell us how you arrived at that answer. I don’t drive a car, for starters. I answered the question. Driving a car forces you to assume responsibility for your actions. You willingly take the risk and if something does happen, as you mentioned, you get in trouble with the law. You can land in jail or in some cases be charged with murder and get executed. What astonishes me is why the same aspect of morality doesn’t apply to having kids. What’s the difference? Example: I have a kid and I’m well aware he can undergo tons of pain. He ends up hating life, undergoes tons of pain, blah blah. I’m not in any trouble. I haven’t done anything wrong. I drive a car and I’m well aware that I can hit someone and make them undergo tons of pain. I hit someone and he undergoes tons of pain, blah blah. I get arrested, charged, and raped in prison. I did something wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Troppus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a587f6/32.png) [@Troppus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Troppus)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/57 "2013-06-23T02:22:11Z")
> [@lankyBlonde](#): > > (2) This is the ironic part. If I drive a car and horribly injure somebody, I am held responsible. I will be arrested, I will be punished, I will get in trouble for my actions. If I have a child and I take a risk and gamble with his life and he ends up undergoing tons of pain, I don’t get in even a bit of trouble. What’s up with that? What in the world are you thinking here? Why don’t you take a tour of the Shiner’s Hospital, of the Ronald McDonald House, or Vanderbilt’s Burn Center? What makes you think parents don’t suffer when their kids do? The worst possible pain I can imagine is my 13 month old sick, in pain, dying, suffering from an incurable disease, suffering through the pain and nausea of chemo, or suffering the injuries of being hit by a self-absorbed teenager who doesn’t know how good she has it. ---
**Author:** ![Among\_Liberals](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Among\_Liberals](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Among_Liberals)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/58 "2013-06-23T02:22:19Z")
> [@lankyBlonde](#): > > I don’t drive a car, for starters. > > I answered the question. Driving a car forces you to assume responsibility for your actions. You willingly take the risk and if something does happen, as you mentioned, you get in trouble with the law. You can land in jail or in some cases be charged with murder and get executed. > > What astonishes me is why the same aspect of morality doesn’t apply to having kids. What’s the difference? > > Example: I have a kid and I’m well aware he can undergo tons of pain. He ends up hating life, undergoes tons of pain, blah blah. I’m not in any trouble. I haven’t done anything wrong. > > I drive a car and I’m well aware that I can hit someone and make them undergo tons of pain. I hit someone and he undergoes tons of pain, blah blah. I get arrested, charged, and raped in prison. I did something wrong. Did you do something wrong when you turned the car on? ---
**Author:** ![lankyBlonde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/dc4da7/32.png) [@lankyBlonde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lankyBlonde)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/59 "2013-06-23T02:22:50Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > No, it’s not ironic. Hurt someone and you’re responsible. Create someone who gets hurt later by someone else? You’re not responsible. It’s not very complicated. > > Think about it with inanimate objects- suppose you create an intricate and beautiful sculpture. Three months later, while it’s on display at the museum, someone breaks in and vandalizes it. Are you responsible in any way for the damage to the sculpture? No. So if I create somebody, knowing VERY WELL that there is a 99% chance that they will lead a very crappy and painful life, I shouldn’t be responsible, right? ---
**Author:** ![Among\_Liberals](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Among\_Liberals](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Among_Liberals)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2013, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667/60 "2013-06-23T02:24:12Z")
> [@lankyBlonde](#): > > So if I create somebody, knowing VERY WELL that there is a 99% chance that they will lead a very crappy and painful life, I shouldn’t be responsible, right? How did you come to this number? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-cant-get-over-this-way-of-thinking/661667.md?page=4)