/lit/ - Literature

Many people, including myself, prefer to live life. And to be honest, I don’t really care if you or even the majority of humans are antinatalists and would rather be dead than alive. I will kill you all if I have to, but you will not kill me. I would torture the most innocent creatures before I would let you pathetic losers wipe everything out just to please your flawed utilitarian sense of virtue. The reason you are all afraid to commit suicide is not that you don’t want your family to friends to suffer, it’s not because you think the suicide itself will be painful, but because deep down, you love life, and you know there is the possibility of being far better than you currently are, that you might one day have the perspective of people like me, who embrace both joy and suffering, and wouldn’t want the world to be any other way. The truth is it’s just a personal problem, and not an objective or universal critique of conscious existence itself. The world has always been full of winners and losers— it should be obvious which group the antinatalists fall under.

>

Doesn't the conclusion to Better Never To Have Been, and the anti-natalist position in general, necessitate not only the voluntary extinction of each human being individually (i.e. each person deciding not to procreate), but also the destruction of everything potentially conducive to bringing about future consciousness?

Since human beings evolved from lower sentient life forms lacking consciousness, and since eradicating conscious human beings still leaves a planet and universe capable of generating future life forms which evolve to possess consciousness, then surely the anti-natalist policy must adopt some kind of scorched earth tactic whereby even an environment capable of allowing non-conscious beings to evolve into conscious beings must also be eradicated considering that by not doing so we are still in some sense allowing conscious beings to be born with our permission (and without theirs)? Or does voluntary extinction by conscious beings suffice to meet the anti-natalist ideal, provided that enough anti-natalist propaganda is left behind us to encourage potential future conscious life forms from opting to do the same, like an abandoned city which, centuries after its citizens have fled, is discovered by a new group of conscious beings who find the place littered with propaganda leaflets, covered in anti-natalist graffiti, and so on?