/lit/ - Literature

>>7492411
>Well yes, but this is an amended position. You had to be talked down from "Anti-natalism is teh stoopidz y no genocide" to "Some anti-natalists are inconsistent in blah blah blah".
It's rather a more clearly explained position than an amended one, the structure of it remains the same. I don't think its merely some antinatalists though but most of them. I don't think I ever encountered any that did not argue from a negative utilitarian position. Which other kinds of antinatalism do you consider common?

>Given that - any bad faith skeletons lurking in your closet?
I'm cursed with a good nose for bad faith to the degree that I can't bring myself to consistently commit to any concrete ideology because the cognitive dissonance caused by knowing that I would never really be committed would be too much to bear to be honest. In practice this means that I stand for nothing, or for wildly different things for short bursts, always realising that there is no foundation to any position I take but that I at least realise this and am therefore at least consistent in my inconsistency.

>>7183829
>unironically living the unexamined life on the philosophy board

>>7125093
>>7125119
Relying on common sense is not philosophy at all, it's unthinking laziness.

>>7125123
Is part of being a good person getting extremely mad over others not accepting your unwarranted intuitive notions of the good and then lashing out at people who ask you to actually argue your position? I'm not sure even the Stoics would abide your kneejerk anti-intellectualism.

Just because a lot of people have a notion of the good that seems obvious to them doesn't mean that the good is obvious. It just means that people have the tendency not to think things through.

>>6554877
>So you think there is no truth in the world
I don't make such ideologically charged and problematic statements.

>but get flustered when you can't find truth anywhere?
I don't do that either.

>>6457935
All I know is that I don't know what he's reading.