/lit/ - Literature

>>16201416
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfgS-HfwVUcj6pcYWvaZPkq5Tyk7qoWXQz8IY9LrNYXshqW-A/viewanalytics

Best I could find.

>>16201452
>push the button to prevent the next 10 quadrillion possible lives from going on in pain without consent
The funny thing is that in a debate between Vegana Gains and AN superhumandance (~8 cumulative hours of long of absolute shit), Richard brought up a good argument- if abiogenesis eventually brought consciousness into existence, who's to say that it won't just occur again? And this time, we're setting back the possible transhumanist utopia that may have been created had we allowed technology to progress. But no, we have to end it all now, because Dracci is a negative Utilitarian that can't respect other's consent (translation: he hates humans but wants to appear polite and reluctant)

>consent is only important when you know your consent has been violated
Thank you, existentialgoof. The next time I go to a party, I'll remember to bring date rape drugs before raping the woman. Don't worry, I won't leave any traces. In N out burger

Imagine wanting to destroy everything just because some people feel bad and jaded. If it's that bad, man, just lobotomize yourself, strap yourself into a pleasure machine. Induce a comatose state. It should be no problem because most of these types think consciousness is a mistake because it leads to a greater capacity for suffering. Very well, end it. If you can't handle the heat, get out of the kitchen

>I'd prefer a button that makes all existing life infertile
>Bill gates wants to know your location
In all likelihood, there would still be asexual reproduction, and we'd be back to square one. Nothing solved. I wonder what the anti-natalist take on asexual reproduction is. Is it unethical? If someone feels no pain at all, can we bring them into existence?

And they talk about the "generations of terror and existential dread," but try to remove everything that would mitigate life's horrors. No religion, no nationalism, no racialism, no family, no struggle, no philanthropy. Are these people adopting children? Donating? Helping others? Let me consult my magic 8-ball. "Outlook not so good."

>>16201460
Exactly. The fertility sects will have a little competition, as the cult of modernity disgorges more jaded, dysfunctional consumers, our future protestors, soulless consumers, and more™. But it's just a conspiracy theory, the talking heads showed me a graph that said everyone is happier, more educated, and well accommodated than ever! If the worst comes to be, they can just give us happy pills.

>>16201551
Heh, Immendham.

>If suffering can be quantified surely less sentient entities or beings that have an ability to suffer is a net good.
You could reduce the amount of suffering, curtail sentience, render sentient beings unable to feel suffering, or simply disagree with your premise that "it is good."