Well, that at least part of the way into freedom.

That depends on your stance on many things: First of all having children or not. Second of all population ethics. Third of all if you think it is worth it to have a child whose life is better than neutral, or even than average, but not better than your own. Existentialism and First Mover Advantage are also related concepts.

I feel your pain though, and my life would have been much worse if my Father had not been an instrumental Flower for part of his life.

But if you consider your life worth living, there are several philosophical paths that do not consider your parent's actions to be unworthy of moral appreciation. Check Toby Ord on population ethics for deeper insight.

Yes, but I don't think it happened for good reasons. Maybe it was just the feeling of something floating from the unknown unknowns category to the mildly known unknown. Maybe it was the feeling that only if you have the courage to try impossible things you can succeed in this kicking in.
But I take it that it was just an emotion that didn't correctly implement decision theoretic cascades of neurotransmitters according to what would have been desirable in a homo economicus perspective. So do many of our less rational emotions. In other words, it is not a feeling I feel responsible for justifying, I just took it at face value.

You may want to change the title to "Analytic Philosophy" or "Contemporary Philosophy" since Modern Philosophy usually refers to something far removed from anything related to "Good and Real" by Drescher.

I know my question sounded like "I doubt you read all posts", and I do, but regardless of that irrelevance, the important meaning should be: "Someone over 18 whose IQ looms large reads all posts?"

Isn't it a terrible use of your time?

you read all posts?

What about the reverse? Moving from discussion to Main once the author notices that not only his introspective evidence says the text is good, but also others?

I have some trouble conceiving of what would beat a consistent argument a googol fold.
Now I don't anymore.

I stand corrected.

Thank you Gwern.

I think he meant unintuitive in the sense of "not accessible by human intuition, type 1, fast thinking" not "hard to grasp upon reflection by my intended audience"