lit/21908901.txt

-----
--- 21908901
*the books that hunts the /lit/ board by being right*
--- 21908913
>>21908901 (OP)
I dont mind suffering because life is pretty
--- 21908920
>>21908913
Say that to a kid with terminal cancer that can leave the hospital. Imagine being this retarded and pyschopatic.
--- 21908931
>>21908901 (OP)
literally just fuck women, as much and as many as you can - that’s your only objective purpose in life, and you’ll forget all about antinatalism once you’re balls deep in some queefing slampig.
--- 21908932
>>21908920
He will agree with me if hes based
--- 21908933
Daily reminder that transhumanism will lead to the complete abolition of all suffering.

 https://www.abolitionist.com/anti-natalism.html

>Benatar's policy prescription is untenable. Radical anti-natalism as a recipe for human extinction will fail because any predisposition to share that bias will be weeded out of the population. Radical anti-natalist ethics is self-defeating: there will always be selection pressure against its practitioners. Complications aside, any predisposition not to have children or to adopt is genetically maladaptive. On a personal level, the decision not to bring more suffering into the world and forgo having children is morally admirable. But voluntary childlessness or adoption is not a global solution to the problem of suffering. 

>Yet how should rational moral agents behave if - hypothetically - some variant of Benatar's diagnosis as distinct from policy prescription was correct? 

>In an era of biotechnology and unnatural selection, an alternative to anti-natalism is the world-wide adoption of genetically preprogrammed well-being. For there needn't be selection pressure against gradients of lifelong adaptive bliss - i.e. a radical recalibration of the hedonic treadmill. The only way to eradicate the biological substrates of unpleasantness - and thereby prevent the harm of Darwinian existence - is not vainly to champion life's eradication, but instead to ensure that sentient life is inherently blissful. More specifically, the impending reproductive revolution of designer babies is likely to witness intense selection pressure against the harmfulness-promoting adaptations that increased the inclusive fitness of our genes in the ancestral environment of adaptation. If we use biotechnology wisely, then gradients of genetically preprogrammed well-being can make all sentient life subjectively rewarding - indeed wonderful beyond the human imagination. So in common with "positive" utilitarians, the "negative" utilitarian would do better to argue for genetically preprogrammed superhappiness.
--- 21908934
>>21908920
Are you saying the boy should be euthanized?
--- 21908939
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqeN2RRR3xQ [Embed]
--- 21908942
>>21908933
Daily reminder that his retard think more people should be put through hell just in hope for some future salvation, kek.
--- 21909067
>>21908901 (OP)
Did you mean to say haunt? Newfag
--- 21909211
The argument for antinatalism is not this gay book, it's liveleak or monkey torture gifs
--- 21909218
>suffering bad
--- 21909220
>>21909211
There is redemption even in torture
--- 21909228
>>21908931
>your only objective purpose in life
Sad and untrue. Much like >>21908901 (OP). Another trash thread by godless nothings seeking nothing but sniffing their dreams' farts to feel like big boys. I can't even believe the secular world can exist.
--- 21909236
>>21908901 (OP)
>mentally ill tranny general
You should just kys. You live in the most materially prosperous time and are still whining about how difficult life is.
--- 21909242
>>21909211
That's just an argument against south americans, racist.
--- 21909704
>>21908901 (OP)
i'm just not having kids is all
lol
lmao
i'm just not.... i'm just not going to create and raise children!
boomers seethe eternally
--- 21909819
>>21908901 (OP)
Pic rel is the actual book btw.
--- 21910392
>>21909218
>suffering... Is Le good
>I like suffering therefore all people like suffering too

Imagine being this mentally retarded
--- 21910403
>>21908920
Most kids with terminal cancer would probably agree
--- 21910429
>>21908920
>Cancer
Just one of the many punishments laid upon modern humanity for ruining their bodies. Well deserved. Everyone should get cancer.
--- 21910632
>>21908901 (OP)
Wish I had the courage to kill myself, desu. Been really not feeling life of ever.
--- 21910742
>>21910392
what a dysgenic weakling. that book's right on one point at least: faggots like you should never have been.
--- 21910746
>>21910392
suffering has many merits, i'm sure you can think of a few.
--- 21910790
>>21908901 (OP)
No wonder benatar wants to kill himself he was btfod by Kermit.
https://youtu.be/vsyZcKUP_-k [Embed]
--- 21910798
>>21908913
Fpbp
--- 21910977
Working on my theology of Christian Antinatalism.
--- 21911269
Bump
--- 21911280
I took a very, very large shit last saturday. It was of such a size that I had to find a rubber glove, and break it down bit by bit with my hand for it to even have a chance to flush. We are talking about 5-10 pounds of fecal matter. It was the size of a loaf of bread. 

The relief I felt after passing it was so immense, so overawing that I felt it for three days afterwards. This pleasure alone outweighs all the suffering that (You) have ever felt. I am the Nozickean dookie-monster, and I shit (heh) on hedonist utilitarianism.
--- 21911380
>>21908913
im sure the rationalization of your axiom is sound
--- 21911397
>>21911280
but you're also hedonist no?
personally i do away with both pleasure and pain, you seem to use pain as a means to gain pleasure, so a hedonist.
--- 21911418
>>21908901 (OP)
We're about to get AGI. It'll probably destroy us, but it'll be pretty great if it doesn't. Why give up when you're in the home stretch?
--- 21911447
>>21911418
AGI isn't magic, it probably still has to work under the laws of physics.
--- 21911913
>>21910977
The Cathars and Bogomils already figured it out years ago. You can add Augustine to them too. So you are a few centuries late for that bro.
--- 21912977
/lit/ status:
buck broken
--- 21913151
>>21908901 (OP)
How often do you need to be assblasted you fucking faggot?
--- 21913535
>>21913151
why does antinatalism trigger you so much?
show me where the antinatalists touched you.
--- 21913634
>oh the horror!
>what are we ever gonna do?
>none existent people not existing!!!!
>I weep and shred in horror at this idea

t. natalist
--- 21913650
>>21912977
Still to this day none in the lit has an actual good argument against anti-natalism.
--- 21913659
>>21908901 (OP)
If the book is right, why haven't you killed yourself?
--- 21913661
>>21908933
kek
--- 21913816
>>21913659
not op;
not worth the bother, i was already born tis simply too late.
--- 21913962
>>21911913
I know there are historical antecedents, or at least figures who can be leveraged in that direction.
--- 21913970
>>21913659
I currently have a reason to live.
--- 21914123
>>21913650
It's been refuted many times, actually. That's partially why these threads are so stupid.
--- 21914142
>>21914123
False
--- 21914195
I don't think it's possible to show that having (or not having) children is morally wrong in any objective sense, since there is no objective morality. But I think that not having children is a reasonable course of action to take for oneself, based upon many of the arguments presented by antinatalism. It's also reasonable to use these arguments as if they were objective moral tools in order to convince others to not have children.
--- 21914268
>>21914123
You haven't demonstrated that pain is good.
you just stated that you think it's good.
--- 21914279
>>21908901 (OP)
Ah yes, the Bible of the Nietzschean untermensch. How droll.
--- 21914282
>>21914268
>AHHHHHHHHH I'M SUFFERING, I THINK I'M GOING INSANE AAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH SAVE ME NIGGERMAN
--- 21914291
>>21914282
Niggerman is too weak to save humanity from existence
--- 21914295
>>21914268
The funniest thing about you fags is that you're (probably) first world scum living in the most technologically, medically advanced, wealthiest civilization in the history of mankind, and yet you still bitch and moan, more so than any generation before you. 
Imagine being a galley slave. Imagine your entire family dying of plague. Imagine starving to death. 
>Worse suffering doesn't invalidate my own
Yeah, maybe not. But here's the thing, existence isn't at fault, you're just mentally... unwell I suppose.
--- 21914298
>>21914295
>the most technologically, medically advanced, wealthiest civilization in the history of mankind
And life is still awful
--- 21914304
>>21914295
im a chronic pain sufferer, and yes lesser pain doesn't invalidate shit
i'd like to see you recite your own philosophy while going through the worst pain imaginable
maybe then id start believing that what you say might have some merit.
--- 21915052
Better never to have NEETed - the harm of coming into neetdom.
--- 21915110
>>21914295
Raw population numbers alone mean there is more suffering today than ever in history.

It sucks to have been them, but taken wholistically it's an unlikely circumstance.
--- 21915409
>>implying suffering is bad
--- 21917043
>>21908901 (OP)
An unfortunate thing happened in that you fell into this particular rabbit hole. You're right, he's right, but whatever. Maybe these threads are shitpost and maybe they're catharsis. Either way its pissing in the wind. Just watch cartoons and wait for this to be over because there is no benefit to further exploration.
--- 21917914
>>21914295
Convince me you're not some fucking fatass boomer.
You probably grew up in a time when you could work full time and own a house in 5 years. 
Try doing that today you fucking faggot.
--- 21917941
>>21914295
Even in a "perfect world" I would be bored. There is nothing to do, everything turns to dust, this life means nothing
--- 21918071
>"Life is heckin meaningless and cruel!"
>"I did not give enthusiastic consent to be born! I was birth-raped!"
>"Non-existance is way awsomer than life!"

>"Kill myself? N-n-no... I'm not going to do that... I need to live because... because I need to spread the word of how meaningless and cruel life... It's not like I actually prefer life to death or anything..."
--- 21918098
>>21918071
Antinatalism is winning by the way.
--- 21918103
>>21908901 (OP)
I am childfree, not antinatalist.
I don't give a shit if people's children suffer or die miserably as long as it doesn't affect me.
--- 21918171
>>21908901 (OP)
>It's another episode of pessimist loser cuck being miserable
And he chickens out of suicide, as usual.

>And it seemed to him that there was not a single article of faith of the church which could destroy the chief thing—faith in God, in goodness, as the one goal of man’s destiny.

>Under every article of faith of the church could be put the faith in the service of truth instead of one’s desires. And each doctrine did not simply leave that faith unshaken, each doctrine seemed essential to complete that great miracle, continually manifest upon earth, that made it possible for each man and millions of different sorts of men, wise men and imbeciles, old men and children—all men, peasants, Lvov, Kitty, beggars and kings to understand perfectly the same one thing, and to build up thereby that life of the soul which alone is worth living, and which alone is precious to us.

>Lying on his back, he gazed up now into the high, cloudless sky. “Do I not know that that is infinite space, and that it is not a round arch? But, however I screw up my eyes and strain my sight, I cannot see it not round and not bounded, and in spite of my knowing about infinite space, I am incontestably right when I see a solid blue dome, and more right than when I strain my eyes to see beyond it.”

>Levin ceased thinking, and only, as it were, listened to mysterious voices that seemed talking joyfully and earnestly within him.

>“Can this be faith?” he thought, afraid to believe in his happiness. “My God, I thank Thee!” he said, gulping down his sobs, and with both hands brushing away the tears that filled his eyes.
--- 21918174
>>21918098
Check the birthrates, loser.
--- 21918183
>>21918174
Over 60 million abortions in the US alone since Roe v. Wade. Who knows what the broader numbers are. Most developed nations also below the population replacement rate. Specifically the higher races (the only ones I care about) are dying out. The future earth is going to be a sludge planet inhabited by soulless mud people.
--- 21918192
>>21915409
>Noooooooo, pleasure is the ultimate goal of existence. If I hurt my ankle it means that life is meaningless!
To an extent I'm glad that these clowns put themselves out of the human development pool. But in reality, they need medical treatment.
--- 21918195
>>21918183
Birth rates, loser. Check them.
>soulless mud people
More soul than a vasectomised psychopath.
--- 21918203
>>21918195
>Birth rates, loser. Check them.
As I stated, I don't care about all humans, only particular races.
--- 21918214
>>21908901 (OP)
This is the opinion of someone without a serious interest in philosophy.

The argument works because it confirms a preheld bias toward suffering, his main premise is that the inflicting of suffering carries moral weight that the receiving of pleasure/happiness/whatever does not.

But this skips over the entire sub-discipline of meta-ethics, where you'll find that this notion of even valuing "pleasure" or "happiness" is outdated by at least a century. Most consequentialist these days are "preference utilitarians", because as an ethical theory preference utilitarianism is able to account for the fundamentally subjective nature of moral values.

If he's right, then he's right in a framework that sees ethics as merely not inflicting suffering, and this is a framework that is easily escaped. To say he's "wrong" would be missing the point, more like: even if he is, broadly speaking, right, he wouldn't be universally so.
--- 21918224
>>21908901 (OP)
sick and tired of these crap threads, every day the same
jannys do your job
--- 21918226
>>21918203
>I don't care about all humans
Good that humans don't care about such cuck perspective either. Did your favorite pessimist scribbler consult you about this?
--- 21918229
Whether suffering is bad in itself is complicated. For example if I want to get X, but the only way to get X is to suffer in some way, I might consent to the suffering and view it as worthwhile if I want X badly enough. This is normal human behavior. But the fact remains that it would have been preferable to get X without suffering for it. That I have to suffer for things that I want is a defect of existence and is sufficient to render antinatalism a reasonable response to existence. This is part of how existence itself keeps you trapped within a system composed of suffering. Anything that is good in existence is built upon a foundation of suffering.
--- 21918237
>>21918229
(cont.) A response to this might be that it isn't necessarily better to receive something without suffering for it. For example one might claim that suffering builds character. But the reason that we need a character that is improved by suffering, is to help us respond to future suffering. This is just another aspect of the trap I referred to.
--- 21918238
>>21918229
Yeah, pessimists never grew up to learn what delayed gratification is.
>That I have to suffer for things that I want is a defect of existence
Says who?
--- 21918239
>Say it's better to not exist
>Continue to choose to exist

Every breath you take refutes your own thesis anti-natalist sisters.
--- 21918246
>>21918238
Says me. You need to suffer to get things that are good. You need to suffer to create things that are good. You suffer to get and create things that are good so that you can use them to relieve suffering. You cope and say that the suffering you undergo is good because it helps you to endure future suffering that you will undergo to get and create things that will help you relieve suffering.
--- 21918250
>>21914195
but having children is joy.
--- 21918255
>>21918246
>Says me
Sucks to be you.
>You cope
Yes. And through this men endure suffering on their way to good. It's not a "defect" of existence, it is existence. Per aspera ad astra, bitch.
--- 21918263
>>21918255
>And through this men endure suffering on their way to good.
You try to achieve the good to alleviate suffering. It's all circular as I said. Existence is a trap of suffering.
--- 21918275
Taking a shit is the perfect example of existence. Taking a shit is suffering. You have to stop whatever you're doing and expel waste from your asshole and then clean up. But doing it feels good, your body creates a pleasure response because your body needs you to do it (same with eating, urinating, etc.). So you go shit because your body requires you to shit because if you didn't shit you couldn't keep suffering so that you can shit again tomorrow, on and on until you die.
--- 21918290
>>21918263
>You try to achieve the good to alleviate suffering
No, you go through suffering to achieve good.
>Existence is a trap of suffering.
Existence is a war against entropy. The eternal jihad against the dying of the light, if you will. That's just how the nature is, with or without you.
--- 21918476
whats the point of this debate? nobody will ever be convinced by words or logic to do or not do something that is essentially, a bodily function.
--- 21918484
>>21918476
Bored and have nothing else to do
--- 21918608
>>21918476
The perpetual humiliation of the loser pessimists, of course.
--- 21918735
I’ve read pic related, but I didn’t get too much from it. I understand it objectively, but at the same point it doesn’t jive with my own sensibilities. I did like Thomas Liggoti though, but these writers are all maladaptive in their own way. Not really stoked on taking life advice from those that deny vitality and forward personal progression
--- 21918845
I think, when you strip away all cultural notions about procreation (i.e. "having children", "becoming a parent", "giving the inlaws grandkids", etc) what you're actually doing is creating another human body.

There are significant downsides to being a human body. I'll list some:
>constant need to maintain homeostasis, at risk of death
>for example - constant need for warmth, water, calories, vitamins, minerals, protection 
>the capacity for injury, illness, disease, accidents
>the capacity to cause harm to other human bodies, and animal bodies
>inevitable decay and decline of function as we age
>inescapable death of the body

I just really do not understand why anyone would want to put these conditions in place for another body to spend their time dealing with, mitigating, addressing, etc. These are just "base" needs as well, we have all kinds of other social, sexual, existential needs as well. It's endless. 

Why make someone else deal with it? Only to die in the end just like you?
--- 21918951
>>21908901 (OP)
I've said it before and I'll say it again: the womb of a woman can never be penetrated by anything but a man's seed. His thoughts and philosophies are irrelevant and will never penetrate her consciousness, which is secondary to the drives of her womb. 148 IQ men can grumble on boards like this all day and write books like picrel but literal Forest Gump retardesses will fuck 3 different apes and bear them 5 children while they're in and out of jail. Unless we return to actual paternalism (which still has illegitimate children) or invent artificial wombs, women will control childbearing and childbearing discourse. Discussions of antinatalism by men is materially pointless.
--- 21918957
The OP is insincere or he would support euthanizing everyone, especially kids with cancer, but he won’t because he knows life is preferable to death. He won’t say the Holocaust was a great moral accomplishment. He won’t advocate for nuclear war. Truth is, he is too unattractive or lacks the means to have children and so pretends he is morally superior, akin to Nietzsche’s understanding of the slave morality.
--- 21919249
>>21908939
https://youtube.com/watch?v=XnnOhZuny_M [Embed]
--- 21919334
>>21913535
I don't care about antinatalism and I think in general that it's a good thing that the weak purge themselves. What bothers me is the fact that you are such a spineless faggot who spams this garbage virtually every day without contributing anything or having any meaningful discussion. There have been made plenty of effortposts in your previous spam threads and you never answer any of them.
--- 21919373
Obviously this nihilistic pessimistic schtick is just that otherwise these people wouldn't filibuster they would just kill themselves the real debate is what do we do about the population because a few beard twiddling overthinking people will use this as an ideology to live hedonistically under the cover of complaining and then a lot of Indians and Africans and so on will continue to have the room temperature IQ children until the Earth is barren of all life. 

To say nothing of the current Nations and their status quo this will cause the world as we know it to eventually run out of these bargain bin ethnicities to hopscotch back and forth as a means of Outsourcing population and demographics. No one that doesn't want to have unprotected sex with attractive healthy partners everyone wants eugenics by its very nature because that's what you're evolved to want it's just pretty healthy people fucking. Homo and asexuality and so on aren't valid identities let alone biological realities. They're mental illnesses. 

In order to perpetuate itself as ridiculous as it may sound the state will have to create a system of orphanages in which people can apply to basically breed and then dump the kid off cuz no one wants to raise it and then go back to their being doctors or Instagram influencers etc. 

That's the smart path forward that's not malicious but this system is not smart and is malicious. I hope you like tsunamis of trash and can speak Igbo.
--- 21920203
Do antinatalists have an answer to 10 billion sub-saharan africans? What is the antinatalist position on foreign aid?
--- 21920226
>>21920203
Stop giving them so much aide and teach them effective methods of protection.

Yes, it is that simple.
--- 21920281
>>21920226
What if we stopped them from procreating?
--- 21920320
>>21920203
Don't care what happens to black people.
--- 21920392
>>21920320
Black people will still happen to you
--- 21920400
>>21920392
Not if my race stops having children and goes extinct.
--- 21920405
The irony is that proponents of antinatalism, due to concerns of ethics or harm reduction, are also the ones promoting refugees, malaria nets, maximum bantu vaccination and expropriation of calories to africa.
--- 21920450
>>21920405
Don't support any of those things.
--- 21920542
god antinatalists are insufferable. we get it
--- 21920543
>>21909228
>muh gods
Cuckshit. Jew worshiper. Unintelligent.
--- 21921086
>>21919249
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFdj41ndC5E [Embed]
--- 21921416
>>21921086
I still can't believe how kind he is towards Mario.
It really hurt him on some level that MM was so sick and went so far off the rails. Inmendham really does come from a place of empathy. You can tell it hurts the guy just to consider human existence.
--- 21921478
Anon fears the presocratics
--- 21921522
>>21921478
I fear for my cornhole around them.
--- 21921645
This thread reminded me of a madman i saw on youtube that basically wants to reduce suffering by reducing natural life on earth. Also against composting because the bugs suffer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i_bjw9HS80 [Embed]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5mZz07SJZI [Embed]
--- 21921702
Today I will not have children
--- 21921862
I've become less extreme in my antinatalism. 
Because things only exist for a short period of time and than they cease existing. This is merciful.
I think bad or good don't exist and that everything nesscarily works for its own benefits.
We can suffer but we can and so must bare our suffering.
Monistic thinking is changing my perception. I can't view life as something that was done to me (parents conspiring to spawn me, or an evil demiurge) but rather something that I have done to myself. I have no self existences that isn't contingent on everything that exist around me. I am a table, I am the stars, I am a pool of water, I am a dirty rag, I am my mother. 

I won't have children but not because I am against it but because I am an autistic dysgenic incel.

I still think its reckless to have children however. Since eternal recurrence, eternalism, empty individualism and less likely eternal hellfire are possibilities.

I know God hates me because I am best a realizing Gods true nature which he has tried to conceal. This is why I am being punished.
--- 21922201
>>21921645
>https://briantomasik.com/my-dating-profile/

His dating profile lol. a 40 page essay in autism.
--- 21922249
>>21921862
>I think bad or good don't exist
>We can suffer but we can and so must bare our suffering.
If there is no good or bad then there isn't anything you must or must not do
--- 21922276
Worth considering. How do antinatalists respond?

https://youtu.be/_rZwnJ1cE1s [Embed]
--- 21922295
>>21922276
Nightmarish
--- 21922419
>>21922276
respond by creating a religion based on antinatalism.

Despite having a deeply held belief about having children being immoral, these antinatalist will recognize that by not having children they are harming the world by leaving it to other people who are without this truth. Their children will be like beckons of light who repair the world and swim up stream against entropy. Bearing the torch of biological existence in a journey to understand the universe. 

The goals of the antinatalist religious movement could be to
- reduce suffering
- end biological existence if possible
- understand reality
- merge the entirety of biological life with God 

There is only one way to go: forever onwards
--- 21922438
>>21908901 (OP)
Suffering isn't real.
--- 21922667
>>21922438
Parental duties aren't real.
--- 21923001
>>21908913
Based!
--- 21923034
>>21910429
>modern humanity
Cancer is called "cancer" because ancient Greeks thought the tumors resembled crabs
--- 21923122
Schopenhauer debunked antinatalism. The will is always there. It will always strive.
--- 21923637
>>21922201
Oh my god, the requirement list is hilarious. This man is lolcow material.

Also, he has another autism site dedicated to suffering
https://reducing-suffering.org/
--- 21923741
>>21921416
More of Mario's views on antinatalism:
https://vitrifyher.wordpress.com/2019/12/19/antinatalism-in-purgatory/

>I’m an antinatalist. I think it’s unforgivable to bring new people into this world given that there is suffering. The thing is that lately I’ve been thinking and feeling that people aren’t real. This would partially solve the problem of evil. There is just my suffering and everyone else is a simulation designed to spite me. This should cause me to not feel so antinatalist since the breeders are disgusting alien mockeries of a true human being, namely myself. Yet somehow I still feel very antinatalist. When I see children with their parents I am disgusted at the entire concept. They are probably just facets of the simulation and not souls brimming with the inner light of awareness like myself. And yet they still move me enough to cause disgust. I suppose that was the intention of the designer(s), to create something that appeared so real that it was actually disturbing. Dr. Miller says I have some sort of syndrome after finding out about my solipsism. I think he’s an imbecile who deserves to be burned on a stake. But out of my bodhisattva-like compassion I would instead grant him a consciousness and send him to heaven forever.

>Like I’ve said before, it’s plausible to me that this is a punishment. My failure at making friends, then my failure at soccer, then my failure in the stock market, then my failure at university, then my crippling depression. The reason I think it’s a punishment may just be projecting a sense of justice to something that is intrinsically devoid of any anthropomorphic qualities. But it may also be that there really is intelligent design (which I now strongly feel is the case) and the reason this isn’t heaven is because the force behind existence isn’t like me. It’s not the sort of thing that would give heaven to its enemies.
--- 21923749
Moral considerations only make sense when talking about people who are born, either actually or hypothetically. The unborn don't exist and indeed to talk of them as moral beneficiaries is actually nonsensical.
--- 21923750
>>21921645
>>21922201
>>21923637
He also thinks consciousness doesn't exist.

https://longtermrisk.org/the-eliminativist-approach-to-consciousness/#Denying_consciousness_altogether
--- 21923955
>>21923749
>Moral considerations only make sense when talking about people who are born ... hypothetically
You refuted your own stupid objection
--- 21923997
>better never to have been!
--- 21924020
If I wasn't a Christian, I'd agree with this work 100%. However, God has a purpose for everything that comes into being and His knowledge far outweighs my own. I take comfort in the fact that He works all things together for the good of those who love Him. Without this, however, life is dismal and suffering is entirely pointless. Having children would be a travesty. Indeed, so would all existence be.
--- 21924022
>>21923997
You unironically can only understand the true horror of existence if you lead a relatively privileged life. If you're some peasant in Cambodia or something you'll just slave away unthinkingly.
--- 21924034
>>21924020
This is the certainly the most popular coping mechanism. But it also means that suffering is not something finite, but infinite.
--- 21924041
>>21924020
Wouldn't have kids if there's a chance of them going to hell.
--- 21924053
>>21923955
No, you just have shit reading comprehension.
--- 21924058
>>21924020
>Having children would be a travesty. Indeed, so would all existence be.
Life is an infinitely worse travesty if Christianity is true. Your religion says that the majority of people literally get tortured forever after they die. I would argue that the case for antinatalism is far stronger if Christianity is true, since you are potentially subjecting your children to eternal damnation. The pointless suffering is only finite according to standard atheism.
--- 21924073
>>21924034
For some, I suppose it is a coping mechanism. But as for me, I had no real desire to crawl out of the meaninglessness of my existence. It was God who called me out. Believe what you like, but I hold to Christianity because, by the grace of God, I believe it's true.

That being said, I cannot for the life of me believe that the universe came out of nothing, or that mere physical matter is infinite; that it has always been. As absurd as the idea of God (let alone a triune God) is, the idea that everything came from nothing, or from mere infinite matter, is even more absurd to me.
--- 21924089
>>21924058
To be quite frank, I agree with you in this as well. However, my understanding does not match with God's. He tells us that children are a blessing. Man was commanded to "be fruitful and multiply." Do I understand why this would be so if so many will end up in eternal suffering? Not entirely, no. But that is where faith comes in. Everything is by faith, really.

I don't personally desire children, but I don't know what the future holds. We aren't meant to understand everything.
--- 21924099
>>21923955
I'll spoonfeed you.

The difference between talking about the welfare of hypothetical future humans and antinatalism is that the first takes births as given. It goes: "assuming humans WILL be born, what is the most moral way of treating them (implicitly: once they are born)?" It does not discuss the morality of bringing them into existence, only what to do regarding them once they've been brought into being.

Antinatalism, however, posits, for any given individual human, a choice between existing and not existing, and says that not existing would be generally better/more moral for them. But this is incoherent. Because if they hadn't been born there would be no "them" that "not existing" would be better for. Bringing people into existence is not per se a moral action towards them because there is no "them" before they're brought into being. We can only be moral to them once they're actually alive. 

"Never been born" is not preferable to "being born" because it's not really a choice (there is no "you who was never born" and "you who was born" to choose between).
--- 21924110
>>21908920
Why would that kid be upset about having terminal cancer if he didn't think life was worth living. Seems like he would agree.
--- 21924115
>>21908933
>Complete abolition of all sensation and meaning
Fixed your post for you
--- 21924117
Living and learning is mostly suffering and being traumatized. Life sucks and it always will. I can’t understand people who have kids either. Actual good parents are rare. Most people are awful at parenting and being partners.
--- 21924119
>>21924053
>>21924099
The distinction you're making is meaningless. You're still discussing something that does not actually exist, but might. You simply draw an arbitrary line at one point so that the opposing argument can be cut off without being given further consideration.
--- 21924132
>>21924073
I used to be a Christian and would have given a similar answer to you. I believe because I was given faith, etc. As for the creation of the universe, there's simply no way to know. If I think one explanation is more reasonable than another, that has no bearing on what actually occurred.
--- 21924152
>>21908920
Now tell all the kids that don’t have cancer that they shouldn’t get to live because of the ones who do.
--- 21924153
>>21924119
>You're still discussing something that does not actually exist, but might.

You're an imbecile.
--- 21924163
>>21924153
Rather I don't buy into your semantic bullshit. There is functionally no difference between, say, buying life insurance for the benefit of a future child you may or may not have, and choosing not to have a child. It's the same sort of action.
--- 21924172
>>21924152
this holy shit antinatalists are retarded
>uhhhh I feel bad u should feel bad too
>well I don't
>WHAT??? ARE U LE PSYCHOPATH???
--- 21924188
>>21923034
Completely accurate desu
--- 21924196
>>21924163
>Rather I don't buy into your semantic bullshit.

The antinatalist proposition IS the semantic bullshit.
--- 21924199
>>21924152
>Uh you can't morally reason about children that don't exist so there
>Tell that antinatalist shit to the kids that don't exist bro, that's really mean
So this is the power of natalism
--- 21924207
>>21922419
Rightoids, christcucks, mudslimes, Jews and their mental slaves will never allow something similar to this to spawn.
--- 21924214
>>21924199
What's with antinatalist types and shit reading comprehension?
--- 21924215
>>21924196
Considering the possible suffering of beings that do not exist, but might exist, is perfectly reasonable. It's one of the considerations behind having animals spayed/neutered for example.
--- 21924221
>>21924214
You need to say something that isn't nonsensical for others to comprehend it.
--- 21924227
>>21924215
>Considering the possible suffering of beings that do not exist, but might exist, is perfectly reasonable.

But that is not an exclusively antinatalistic concern and is not the same as the proposition "it is preferable/better for them not to exist than to exist".
--- 21924231
>>21924227
And? You're doing the same thing as earlier, where you make a meaningless distinction and pretend it proves something. Oh, it's not *exclusively* an antinatalist concern? So fucking what? It's the same sort of logic, and one you presumably have no issue with in other cases since you're trying to prevent me from referring to it.
--- 21924265
Never understood how some people experience life, especially in first world countries, as suffering. Life on average is great. I think some people really need to get out of the cities and start a garden or something. Come on over to /hgm/ on /out/ and stop being miserable.
--- 21924266
>>21924231
>It's the same sort of logic

No, it is not. The issue with the antinatalist proposition is not that it deals with hypotheticals, as you are obsessively fixated on. It is that it is based on one specific incoherent hypothetical.

"It is preferable/better for me not to exist than to exist" is incoherent. If I never exist, then there is no "me" for things to be better for. I can't be the beneficiary of a situation if I don't exist.

We can only talk about alternatives within the context of an existing entity, be it actually existing or hypothetically existing. "It'd be better for me if I'd never been born" works as a manner of speech, as a figurative expression of exasperation or despair, but not on the literal level, but it is on the literal level that antinatalists operate. The entire worldview is based on the "semantic bullshit" you denounced back then, it's literally just wordplay.
--- 21924286
>>21924266
No one says that a nonexistent person is benefiting from not existing. We are simply preventing the suffering that they would have endured had they existed, which fits your criteria that it is permissible to reason about a hypothetically existing being.
--- 21924292
>>21924266
Also you are engaging in semantics because you take this >>21924286 and then reword it into something else (that I am making statements about the conditions of something that doesn't exist) which you can then dismiss.
--- 21924367
>>21908933
I want to live in a transhumanist world
I'm so tired of being baseline human
--- 21924374
>>21908920
>Say that to a kid with terminal cancer that can leave the hospital.
He can live his entire life watching anime and playing videogames bro. I can even get some brown bitches for him to suck his balls dry if he wants to.
--- 21924672
>>21918071
>"Life is heckin meaningless and cruel!"
Benatar says that it is felt only from a cosmic perspective. It can have meanings.
Benatar says that life is meaningless only from the cosmic perspective. It can have meanings.
--- 21925384
>>21921086
I like his color wheel analogy when it comes to describing the variety of people.
--- 21925431
Ultimately it doesn't make sense to demand from humanity to do the deed.
they just won't listen, people that get into antinatalism were probably already convinced before they even started seriously thinking about this stuff.
however I think we should still promote antinatalism left and right, we have nothing to lose anyways.
--- 21925446
>>21924367
--- 21925484
>>21924089
So basically what you're saying is "I'm a mindless order follower who does what he's told without question, even if it means torturing innocent people". Martin Zender is right about you people being modern-day Eichmanns.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1nIpaJF3t8 [Embed]
--- 21925500
>>21925446
A mix of furry and machine please
Also why are all the posthumans female? (not that I would mind...)
--- 21925512
>>21925431
>we have nothing to lose anyways
Not entirely accurate. Antinatalism is easy for the first few years until one day you wake up in abject horror. When you really do begin to conceive of the universe as a possibly endless suffering machine, you find it hard to prepare a cup of coffee, let alone go to work or engage with reality. Turns out that "deny our programming" bit eventually breaks the machine. 

The best argument against antinatalism is that it turns your life into complete shit. Fuck utilitarian standards or some moral duty. You either put that shit down or it breaks your spine. Like I have already stated ITT, its an unfortunate thing to discover and its a true as anything. The only salvation lies in a total abandonment of consideration of the facts.
--- 21925519
>>21908901 (OP)
>*the books that hunts the /lit/ board by being right*
I assume you mean "haunt"...
--- 21926239
>>21925512
It depends on the person I would say. I already had that wake up call of dread as describe it and yes I no longer am compelled by my programming either but this just means that I don't fear death anymore.
if life gets too hard ill just leave, otherwise ill stick around and see what I can do instead. im willing to give this a shot, strategize, I have personally nothing to lose anyways.
--- 21926242
>>21925484
He looks like Graham Chapman
--- 21926253
>>21926239
cont
in a way it's the natalists that have everything to lose and they're the ones that have to keep fighting for it, survival that is.
we humans have to constantly look out for dangers that threaten our existence it's literally a losing battle against entropy.
antinatalists just need to strategize and exploit that.
--- 21926347
>>21926239
>I already had that wake up call of dread
>I don't fear death anymore.
If you don't fear death, you haven't had the wake-up call yet.
--- 21926404
>>21926347
i've been dead, very close. the survival instinct is always a torture but in the abstract I don't care.
--- 21926862
I just cannot understand procreation.

Why purposefully make another human?

I know, from being a human myself, that it involves non-trivial harm. 

So why would I make that, for someone else to deal with? There's no downside to not being born.
--- 21926875
>>21918214
>this notion of even valuing "pleasure" or "happiness" is outdated by at least a century
try 2.4 millenia. The Greeks had that covered before Socrates
--- 21926880
>>21926862
NPC cattle don't think, im genuinely convinced that neurotypicals aren't very rational. they have conformists minds, conformity takes over in the neurotypical brain.
and they don't have the need to rationalize their thoughts beyond a certain extent, they don't overthink. they can't make the connection that creating a person is unnecessary because they don't begin to think about it.
whats a daily reality for me and you is a once in a blue moon event to normies.
as for rational people that procreate, they're also retarded but in a slightly different way.
neurotypicals aren't deluded they're just idiots. rational natalists are, however, deluded.
--- 21926888
>>21926862
>>21926880
Why haven't you killed yourselves? Could it be that you enjoy living and don't want to die?
--- 21926906
>>21926888
dying is not the same as not being born
--- 21926909
>>21926906
Why haven't you killed yourself?
--- 21926919
>>21926909
Or anyone else. Because he thinks dying is bad and not desirable, which it would not be if existence is undesirable. But procreation genes takes huge effort and sacrifice and a certain degree of attractiveness and wealth, and because he is unfit to procreate he ascribes evil to those who are fit.
--- 21926937
>>21926919
doesn't matter, i dont really see the point of this.
a lot of people commit suicide. im sure that among antinatalists the suicide rate is off the charts compared to the global average.
so in a way antinatalists do kill themselves, statistically speaking.
--- 21926944
>>21926937
No, there are plenty of effective antinatalists but for different reasons, such as saving the planet or having children holding back the careers of women etc. that way the career gals and nu-males can pay themselves on the back for remaining manchildren forever
--- 21926951
>>21926919
>lets prevent suffering
"you stupid fucking incel could never breed if you even tried you genetically unfit CHUD why don't you just KILL YOURSELF HUH yeah still alive aren't ya?? therefore life is GOOD you dumb idiot parenting takes SCRIFICE and EFFORT something YOU are incapable of and no woman would ever LOVE you bla blabla"

Yawn. Is this the extent of natalist logic? 

No birth = no suffering = no want = no need = no death. With no downside. Why do it?
--- 21926955
>>21926951
Death means no suffering either according to you and it will stop much more reproduction that 4chan posts. Certainly agitating for nuclear war with Russia would logically be a goal for anyone who is seeking to wipe out humanity
--- 21926957
>>21926955
Also logically antinatalists should be agitating for euthanasia to treat depression or kids with cancer etc
--- 21926958
>>21926944
yea being an antinatalist for things like the environment doesn't really count.
those are usually referred to as "child free" the terms have become interchangeable in the past few years, antinatalist to me is someone who's pessimistic about life as a whole, almost purely for philosophical reasons.
--- 21926965
>>21926958
No they have exactly the same motives. They are either incapable of reproducing or feel intimidated by the responsibility. Antinatalists are not against human life, they do not support nuclear war or euthanizing unwanted children
--- 21926971
>>21926955
>dying is not the same as not being born

Why can't you grasp this? The unborn have no interests, no desires, etc. Once born people have considerations like 
>avoiding harm
>avoiding dying
>goals desires etc that will be frustrated by death

there is a difference between killing someone and not having a child. this is trivial.

I mean really your argument is so stupid I'm bored
--- 21926979
>>21926965
nuclear war wouldn't solve the problem anyways.
even if humans go extinct, the issue is life, all life.
--- 21926983
>>21926971
If existence and life is undesirable then removing them is desirable. If however it is better to live than to die, then creation of life is no sin
--- 21926985
>>21926979
Nuclear war would significantly reduce life, probably the most life-reducing measure possible
--- 21927000
>>21926985
The theorized meteor that took out the dinosaurs was orders of magnitudes more impactful than a any world wide nuclear war combined, and even that wasn't enough to wipe out life.
nuclear war wouldn't even begin to address the problem.
--- 21927004
>>21926983
I actually think you're too stupid to understand that the "unborn" don't actually exist. Like I genuinely think you don't grasp this.

Not starting a life is not the same as killing someone, or killing yourself, or dying.
--- 21927009
>>21927004
he's a literal mudslime lol, what do you expect from religious people?
--- 21927011
>>21927000
Nuclear war won’t extinguish all life but it will extinguish a lot more than anything else humanity can do

>>21927004
If life is a disease and malady then curing it would be a good thing
--- 21927467
>>21913659
--- 21927480
>>21927467
>life is an horrific disease which it is just too much of a chore to end in and instant but not too much of a chore to spend hours and hours every day toiling to maintain
--- 21927484
>>21927480
learn how to properly speak english before trying your hand at posting on a literature board
--- 21927548
>nihilist
>Doesn't inmediately kill himself
Opinion discarded. Keep crying in your moldy basement while I enjoy the magnificience of the universe
--- 21928013
I used to be an Antinatalist...
Until I watched Mario Montano's video
--- 21928094
>>21928013
How did he convert you to natalism?
>inb4 he killed himself and that makes him automatically wrong
--- 21928194
>>21928094
He taught me that consciousness is inevitable.
Even if I kill myself, I'll just end up living on a different timeline
--- 21928291
>>21923997
This image is so stupid. Yes this exist, but you can die of hunger in this place. This exist, but torture chambers exist too. Anyway, this is just stupid
--- 21928308
>>21926919
>procreation genes takes huge effort and sacrifice
wtf
--- 21928353
>>21911447
But the upper bound of information transmission and storage in physics is many many many magnitudes larger than the way we have organically evolved. Computers can transmit electrical signals hundreds of times faster than the human brain. The hard part is just the software.
--- 21928365
Why are antinatalist such attention whores? Why should one care about their outlook on life? It feels as if their real goal is to drag everyone down to their miserable state
--- 21928411
>>21923997
the demiurge memes are too damn funny.
--- 21928419
>>21928194
No reason to believe that.
--- 21928423
>>21928353
So let's assume that it's impossible to break the laws of physics. all you did is just make a super smart einstein. the AI can't just do magical things, there are limited resources it can't make those from scratch. it can't just terraforming earth into a utopia.
--- 21928427
>>21928423
start terraforming*
--- 21928448
>>21908931
jokes aside, this is the real answer
it's just how our entire existence is oriented
--- 21928471
>>21928448
i know thats not the point but,
sex ≠ procreation
--- 21928484
>>21908931
>>21928448
"No"
--- 21928855
>>21910632
Unironically study NDEs and realize that there actually is an afterlife and that we are eternal and will go to heaven unconditionally when we die. And while the Bible and the Qu'ran convinces few people who do not already believe, the book in pic related is known to convince even hardened skeptics that there is an afterlife and that we are eternal and will go to heaven unconditionally when we die. And there are scores of studies confirming that reading about or listening to NDEs lessens or removes the fear of death. And YouTube is filled with NDErs and their testimonies. Once you read and listen to NDEs enough, you will not only not fear death, but actually look forward to it with excitement.

Here is a very persuasive argument for why NDEs are real:

https://youtu.be/U00ibBGZp7o [Embed]

It emphasizes that NDErs are representative of the population as a whole, and when people go deep into the NDE, they all become convinced. As this article points out:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/mysteries-consciousness/202204/does-afterlife-obviously-exist 

>"Among those with the deepest experiences 100 percent came away agreeing with the statement, "An afterlife definitely exists"."

Since NDErs are representative of the population as a whole, and they are all convinced, then 100% of the population become convinced that there is an afterlife when they have a sufficiently deep NDE themselves. When you dream and wake up, you instantly realize that life is more real than your dreams. When you have an NDE, the same thing is happening, but on a higher level, as you immediately realize that life is the deep dream and the NDE world is the undeniably real world by comparison.

Or as one person quoted in pic related summarized their NDE:

>"As my soul left my body, I found myself floating in a swirling ocean of multi-colored light. At the end, I could see and feel an even brighter light pulling me toward it, and as it shined on me, I felt indescribable happiness. I remembered everything about eternity - knowing, that we had always existed, and that all of us are family. Then old friends and loved ones surrounded me, and I knew without a doubt I was home, and that I was so loved."

Needless to say, even ultraskeptical neuroscientists are convinced by really deep NDEs.
--- 21929014
if you could raise everyone's IQ two standard deviations the birth rate would almost hit zero world wide.
some would still breed™ of course.
--- 21929049
>>21924199
Kids that don't have cancer do, in fact, exist.
--- 21929054
>>21928855
stale pasta
--- 21929455
>>21927467
t bee honest
--- 21930017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XAKh8gwsb0 [Embed]
--- 21930179
>>21913650
there's nothing wrong with it, same way there should be nothing wrong with a spiritual devote abstaining from all creature comforts and living in pure stoicism. the issue arises when you look at the type of person that is the common proponent of anti-natalism, very often an ultra-materialistic hedonist, and they are trying to convince us that denying our physical purpose, I'll elaborate:

The problem is not in anti-natalism itself but the hypocritical philosophy of it's proponents. In fact, the absolute best critic of anti-natalism would be some kind of celibate monk type who has known a higher pleasure from understanding the world at a transcendent level, one that is not often achieved by the people wandering in the forest, frolicking and reproducing, with all their joys and sorrows. A person who reaches this level of transcendence could tell you there is more to life than indulging in creature comforts and reproduction, but instead we're hearing it from the most hedonistic, self-indulgent, decadent and pretentious midwits. They are smugly denying themselves simpler joys, having been enveloped by the modern societal display of wealth and status behavior that has subsumed our animalistic quest for signaling our worth for reproduction. They will need to continually feed an increasingly desperate need for stimulus and distraction from their natural urges, more consumerism, more materialism, more degeneracy, all to avoid introspection into what they really are and can never escape. In the end, they should just be pitied, our entire existence, our senses and our thoughts came into being for the purpose of reproduction, and if someone's thinks they can replace their entire existence with starwars and antidepressants, well, they are in for some cosmic dread eventually, at least when the drugs wear off. For many of us however, we'd take the existential crisis while feeling alive, than willful mental suppression to feel nothing. Who's the nihilist again?
--- 21930443
>>21908920
not my issue
--- 21930570
>>21930179
pretentious hedonists are not the issue nor are they an argument against, that's just something you have a personal problem with.
also antinatalists aren't necessarily claiming to be nihilists although some are, again this just goes back to you having a few personal bones to pick with a stereotype you have in your head, a stereotype that you have no basis in reason for disliking.
at any case not all antinatalists are hedonists either.
and the funny thing is, antinatalists by definition, people who don't want to procreate as in not want to create the problem in the first place are the ones that make you personally upset, not the crazed natalists that pop out kids left and right without care though, oh no those cannot be responsible nor deserving of criticism and anger. 
definitely the harmless hedonists, those devils! how dare they not upset someone!
--- 21930599
>>21930570
>crazed natalists
what a concept, beings made to procreate procreating, this is not a thing unless you are talking about some fetishization of reproducing which is extremely uncommon at best. anti-natalism is a cult as you yourself are demonstrating, trying to say there is a cult of 'natlists' intentionally having kids to piss you off shows how paranoid you are. saying its my personal problem is projection. Literally no one is having kids because they think it will make some reddit retard angry, they do so because they simply want to.
--- 21930614
>>21930570
It seems like you missed my argumen too, so here:
no one arguing for anti-natalism is wise enough to justify that argument, it's a standard they set for others that they fail to follow themselves. That, in itself, is wrong. Someone deciding to not procreate, for the right or wrong reasons, materialistic hedonism or spiritual celibacy, is morally ambivalent. 
You are arguing from a stance of human primacy, where human suffering is more significant than all suffering in nature. Nature will exist with its suffering even if humans don't, humans are part of that suffering and denying that our procreation is part of nature but rather something more important is human-biased and myopic for someone supposedly arguing for the cosmic good.
--- 21930771
>>21930599
crazed here can also mean idiot. im not blaming anyone directly for procreating. yea for most people it's not a thing they think a lot about, however, the human being is generally deluded even antinatalists, so "crazed natalists" isn't an odd description.
but really I mean a specific group, those that know and have thought about and still wanted to make people, those are definitely crazed even to the average natalist.