A non-parent could similarly argue that you don't get to pass judgement since you are under the influence of cognitive dissonance.

Regardless, I have met parents who feel that way, and it can often turn out poorly for the child, though it really depends. One person I know who feels this way is a DBA who earns more than enough for his wife to raise the kids. She works part-time more to escape cabin-fever than to earn money and seems happy with the arrangement. His long work hours means he doesn't have to deal with the kids any more than he wants to.

"A non-parent could similarly argue that you don't get to pass judgement since you are under the influence of cognitive dissonance."

The difference is that someone who is a parent has also been a non-parent.

Someone who is a non-parent has never been a parent.

That doesn't really make sense. Cognitive dissonance may cause a smoker to rationalize their habit even though they have also been a non-smoker. In fact you could argue that cognitive dissonance is more likely to affect a parent than a smoker, as parents don't have the alternative option of quitting.

You could argue that non-parents may also be under the influence, but having formerly been a non-parent doesn't necessarily mean you're not rationalizing your choice to make you feel better about it.

I don't even pretend to understand what you're getting at with your second paragraph, and since this is HN and not reddit, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you mean no harm. That being said, I might caution you to choose your words wisely and delicately when it comes to commenting on other people's parenting methods. There are few minefields more fraught with peril than those surrounding parenting. Someone less accommodating than I may well take offense to statements like that, so tread lightly.

This is already a busy topic, and this is as good of a chance as I'll have to get something off my chest, so here goes...

There's an obsession verging on dogma in much of the hacker world that rationality is the only path to correct action; that by virtue of being hackers we are all somehow divested of otherwise human frailties like emotion, love, and irrational behaviour. As one of the commenters on this thread so wonderfully said:

> No, you're not some amazing savant that has popped up out of the mass of mediocrity that is humanity.

We are, every single one of us, a fallible creature full of fault, vanity, and ego. To argue that I am under the 'influence of cognitive dissonance' because I am falling prey to one of life's most unstoppable impulses is perhaps the strongest example I've yet seen of the absurdity of rational behaviour as the highest truth.

There is a time to be rational and to appeal to such sensibilities, and as hackers we live in those times more than most people. Crafting, debugging, and similar work pleads for rationality; indeed it is a necessary ingredient for much of the work a hacker does. But its applicability has definite limits, and as with any tool it's critical to know where those limits lie.

The core act of deceit comes when, drunk on the power and clarity of thought that rationality brings, the hacker mind tries to apply this tool to matters of the heart or soul. To pretend that the behaviour of a parent towards their child has its basis in rational thought is to presume rationality is a more human trait than love, or than the desire to express one's will on the world.

When parents say things like 'I love my kid so much that it makes my heart hurt', they aren't being flowery; that's actually what it feels like. A feeling so grounded in the core of our existence as a species that it's inseparable from physical pain; to try and apply rationality to that is the height of naivety. Likewise, when people say things like 'you can't understand unless you've had a child yourself', they aren't being dismissive. Parenthood isn't just another mouth to feed or diapers to change. It is a rewiring of your mind and your soul so complete and severe that it can turn love into physical pain. It is perhaps the most human event that has ever occurred in my life, and I suspect most other parents would say the same.

I have weeped openly for days in both happiness and fear for my daughter's well being. I have walked away from a life that took me a decade to build in order to ensure her health, and I never once questioned the correctness of that decision. Many of my decisions as a parent have been made in the face of rationality, made on a balance of many factors of which the rational course of action was just one. Walking that razor edge between the rational way and the biological imperative is an essential skill of any parent. It is a path impossible to describe yet clear as day if you just know where to look.

The only objective truth is that there are no objective truths. I won't pretend to say that my perspective is any more or less correct than anyone else's, but I will say this: rationality is a double edged sword. It is a potent weapon against bugs, suits, and dogma, but it is also capable of separating you from that which makes you human. Like any tool, it's up to you to decide how to wield rationality. Please just know the consequences before you start swinging it.

All true, but consider that parenthood is not the only path to deeply emotional experiences. You might not have experience with other ways, like extended fasting, extreme adventure, religious revelation, etc.

Calling it "cognitive dissonance" may be condescending, but consider that telling people without kids, "you simply don't get to pass judgement on this" can also come across as condescending. It also doesn't help to start the comment with "balls to this."

I don't think the issue here is rationality vs. non-rationality, but rather allowing a diversity of opinion. If your perspective is not more or less correct than anyone else's, then what was the problem with altrego99's comment? Who are you to tell him what he can and cannot think?

There is no dichotomy between rational decision making and having kids, or any other thing that you might want to do for yourself or others.

Thinking decisions through and being honest with yourself is a GOOD thing, particularly in the case where it will affect the rest of your life and the welfare of one or more children. Rationality is a value.

Nobody has claimed to be an amazing savant. People do have different priorities and not everyone is the same as you. If I like salt and you do not like salt, then each of us can be rational while doing a completely different thing.

If you mean to show that reason has limits and that it has terrible consequences then unfortunately you must use reason to show that, and I cannot see that you have done that.

You're entire rant against rationality is misplaced. "The only objective truth is that there are no objective truths." Please. You may argue that your feelings of love and devotion as a parent are irrational in nature, or even that they're somehow outside of the realm of time and space, but that is neither here nor there when talking about whether parenthood is so consistently fulfilling, irrational or not, to the point where we should recommend it for everyone.

This is a fucking awesome comment, perhaps the best one on HN today, and most certainly in this thread.

Even removed from the "kids aren't so great" angle you are saying something I think a lot of people - especially on HN - need to hear, and you are saying it well. Cheers.

"As your sibling commenter says, you simply don't get to pass judgement on this if you haven't had a child of your own."

You aren't gay, so you can't pass judgement on gay rights.

You don't smoke weed, so you have no say in the laws

The thing is. You can still have an opinion (and pass judgement)..even if you haven't experienced it yourself.

You'll notice that later on my comment I said 'I'm not going to say you're objectively wrong on this'. I'm not begrudging the OP his/her opinion, I'm simply saying that without the mental reset that is parenthood, the OP simply does not have enough information to make any factual statement on the matter.

I'm not saying that the OP is wrong or unentitled, I'm simply saying that they're exhibiting a potent mix of naivety and arrogance that they may want to be more aware of. Or, as my sibling poster said in a better way: "Don't presume in your arrogance that you know quite a bit about something you have zero experience with."

We're not talking about laws here, we're describing experiences. Nobody is suggesting that all people should be parents.

Your corrected analogies are as follows:

You aren't gay, so you can't pass judgement on what it means to be gay.

You don't smoke weed, so you have no idea what it's like to be high.

Both of these statements are perfectly valid, and having a bunch of straight people talk about what it is like to be gay or a bunch of prudes talk about how out of sorts you are when you are high is pretty ridiculous.