4 comments

• 

  Robert S. Porter

  1 year ago

  I don't really think that is a fair reading. He does state "If I had a daughter, I wouldn't want her to get pregnant at 16, for the reasons Will names." I also think it's a bit extreme to conclude that "he’d rather risk the ruin of his daughter’s potential than have her go childless."
  
  In the case that a parent agrees with Caplan's analysis and would prefer an early grandchild above no grandchild, then they would likely have the incentive and desire to help their child to become a success despite poor decision making.
  
  Given that I'm young and childless (and will remains so for the near future as far as I can help it) I'm not convinced that Caplan is wrong. Like Caplan I might prefer an early grandchild to none at all, though certainly not hoping it happened. If you just look at the way some grandmothers react to grandchildren or potential grandchildren I think Bryan might be on to something.
  reply
• 

  Jeff Lilly

  1 year ago

  Personally I would prefer that my daughters have children very very early than not at all, though I also hope that they will do what THEY want and not try to please me in the matter.
  
  Think about a very rich couple with children. Should they buy their children whatever they want, shower them with gifts, secure jobs in their firms for them, etc.? Surely this will make their children happy, rich, high-status, and well-educated. Alternatively, they could give their children a strict allowance based on merit and hard work, help them with college payments but not pay the whole thing, encourage them to find summer work, etc. The children may end up less happy, less rich, less high-status, and even less well-educated, but they will have fantastic growth experiences that will more than make up for these defecits, growth experiences that will make them masters of their own destiny.
  
  In my experience, having a child is a growth experience unmatched by just about any other. It's not about wanting my daughters to be happy (though of course I want that very, very much). It's about wanting my children to experience the same amazing growth that I have had as a father. I'd hate for them to miss out on it, despite the cost to them in terms of happiness, wealth, status, and formal education.
  
  In the Hindu tradition, marriage and children are "yogas" -- disciplines. It's a good way to think about them.
  reply
• 

  John Doe

  1 year ago

  Bryan’s insistence that he’d rather risk the ruin of his daughter’s potential than have her go childless strikes me as perverse. I simply can’t make any sense of it.
  
  Really? You might disagree with it, but you can't even figure it out? A moment's rumination on Darwin's theory of evolution might do the trick (i.e., people have an instinct to see their genes preserved).
  reply
• 

  none

  1 year ago

  There's a possible non-gendered position there, though I don't know to what extent it would describe Caplan. That position would say that it a person's life was terribly incomplete without producing children. That this bears differently on men and women would be a combination of unalterable biological fact, and social norms (which would then be the sorts of things we should try to change).
  
  I think you can also try and make sense of the idea that having a child is a tremendously important default purpose of a person's life, though one which can be canceled by a sufficiently noble goal that replaces it. If I'm not misremembering, Phillipa Foot suggests this line in Natural Goodness.
  reply