/lit/ - Literature

Why is the presence of pain bad? Why is the absence of pain good?

heres a successful argument: you're gay

Being born
Is power

>>12593371
STOP POSTING THAT CALCULUS. ITS NOT RIGHT TO SAY ITS "NOT BAD" TO NOT HAVE ABSENCE OF PLEASURE. THIS ALSO RUNS INTO THE "PERSON-AFFECTING" DILEMMA. POST MINE INSTEAD.

>>12593371
Absence of pain is "Not Bad" not good.

>>12593371
Kill yourself, then, and let the rest of us live.

>>12593604
And here it is

>>12593607
Why do people keep thinking this non-argument is actually an argument when it is not?

>>12593371
Reason is stasis: the immutable laws that govern the interactions of signs. Applied to life, it yields an "ought not to exist." Why not say, "fuck reason"? At the very least, in this particular case? Perhaps "human life in general" is too wide an object to fall under the scope of deductive logic?

>>12593630
Perhaps but also, perhaps not. *sips*

My argument is: I don't care about what's ethical, and I want to cause suffering. Your moralfag mewling is music to my ears.

>>12593371
Assumes univocity of good. Is therefore shit.

>>12593616
Then why don't you explain why it's not an argument instead of presenting a literal non-argument retard

>>12593646
First tell me what your belief system is.

>>12593641
Why should I value reason over feeling in this case? If reason tells me to not reproduce, but I enjoy the act of generation, why should I abide by the duty imposed by reason and not behave pathologically?

>>12593697
>if I like raping and murdering why shouldn't I do those things?

Go ahead De Marquis de Sade

>>12593371

For the same reason that investing works, having children works at creating greater happiness Trends are on your side

>While there are fluctuations, we see ongoing and positive growth in living conditions, availability of goods, and in most measures of global happiness [1]
>While some people will experience dips in happiness or may even deviate from trends dramatically, the share of people who say they are satisfied with life is dramatically increasing

Antinatalism is pointing at the dips and saying "Why would you subject someone to that, look at the decreases!" without looking at the historical and current path of the chart.

It is quite literally projecting.

[1] https://ourworldindata.org/happiness-and-life-satisfaction

>>12593712
Now you're doing it

>>12593371
kek kys

>>12593371
Chances of getting poosy
Dead: N
Alive: Y

Checkmate, antinatalfags.

>>12593738
You literally just said you should be able to do things as long as you like doing them. Why draw the line at reproduction? Why not adopt the entire libertine philosophy?

>>12593568
these are good questions but even more easil asked: why isnt the absence of pain "not good," or the absence of pleasure "good"-- that specific incongruity needs to be defended by antinatalists, but never is

>>12593760
No, I did not say I ought to be able to do whatever I want. You are the one who made the prescription, that I ought to let reason lead me around by the nose because... well, I'm still waiting on that. I am simply asking you to demonstrate the connection between your ought and my is.

>>12593611
What justifies the simultaneous presence and absence of benefit in existence? dumb

>>12593788
There is both the presence of some benefit and the absence of some benefit. If we have 5 apple slots and 3 apples then we say we have 3 apples and are absent 2. Yes you are dumb

>>12593785
You didn't need to say that it was implied by your """""reasoning""""".

>>12593800
No, it wasn't. Saying I see no basis for the ought is not the same thing as asserting that I ought to be able to do whatever I want. The two views are quite in conflict with one another.

>>12593996
This is just a semantic game. Saying you see no basis for what you ought to do in one case, when presented with a rational moral argument, is as arbitrary as saying you see no basis for what you ought to do in another. Tell me where do you get your "is" from the assumed "ought not to" in the case of rape?

>>12593371

>>12594014
>Saying you see no basis for what you ought to do in one case, when presented with my argument (which is right), is as arbitrary as saying you see no basis for what you ought to do in another

That little gem aside, "rape" is already a legal category, like murder. They are both defined as legally impermissible by the state, both by definition subject to state punishment. If someone says "rape is wrong," this can have a number of meanings. It could mean that the legal category is identical with itself, in which case it's a tautology. It could mean that forcing yourself on someone is morally impermissible. It could also mean that the legal category is morally impermissible, that rape laws themselves are a moral violation. So when you say the "ought not to" is "assumed" in the case of rape, it isn't really clear to me what you're trying to get at.

>>12593371
It's unaesthetic

>>12594079
So your reason to not rape and murder is that its ILLEGAL? How's it, slummin' it down there on the bottom rung of Kohlberg's theory of moral development?

>>12594107
My reason to not "rape" or "murder" has nothing to do with reason. I just wouldn't like to, I have killed a living thing before and it was an exceptionally unpleasant experience that I never want to repeat. Empathy and all that. I suspect most people don't murder for the same reason. The law, as you rightly point out, has only ever applied to cretinous weaklings. Most people have empathy and the skilled and passionate "wrongdoers" will always circumvent legal consequences.

>>12593568
Ask your stove

>>12594176
Okay, so as I said before, whether you should do or not do something is up to your personal whim, and presumably by extension, it is up to the mere whims of everyone else what they ought to do?

You're looking at the world through this passive point of view where you try to minimize the harm you can do to yourself and others. It's like an extreme version of ecological minimalism where you view yourself as a parasite that can only but reduce the harm you bring unto this world.

I would rather take an opposite approach, where I instead try to maximize the good I can bring to myself, to others, and to this world. The struggle and effort, the scars and the mistakes are all worth it in the end. That is what you can choose to do with your life.

>>12594259
How does "maximizing good" preclude not reproducing? I also belief in service to your fellow man. It is no service to create insatiable will where none previously existed.

>>12594056
That was easily one of the best /lit/ threads I had ever been witness to.

>>12594306
It can be a great service to create another life, or it can't. The uncertainty and struggle is worth it. If your issue is with consent then it's a non-issue since it is impossible for an unborn child to consent.

>>12594391
service to whom?

See this "person affecting" crap cuts both ways breeders.

>>12593653
Antinatalism

>>12593371
Moral error theory.

>>12594424
Service to the child, to the world.

>procreation is immoral, violates pleasure principle

wow! more people need to know about this. i tried to tell the pregnant girl in my C# class, but she switched section times for some reason

is it a violation of the non-aggression principle to slowly eat yourself? post a comment on this webzone and let me know for only .2LTC

>>12593371
If you are brought into this world you should choose to improve it so there is less suffering. If you kill yourself without children there will be someone else with children and the lack of you and your children will deprive them of a helping hand to improve their life. Even if every human dies life will come back when a new protein cell is formed and these new organisms will undergo suffering in suboptimal conditions you didn't help improve.

>>12593797
In that case then absence of pain should be included as well

>>12594471
>Service to the child
Life is suffering, not bowing existence is probably better desu
>to the world
Unless he/she turns out to be a mass murderer, rapist or parasitic neet

>>12593371
Is antinatalism based in Schipenhauerian beliefs or Misanthropy?

>absence of pain
>Good
Yea kindly fuck off

>>12593371
So that's the power of growing up in divorce. Wow.

>>12593371
>presence of pain
>bad
Faggot.

>>12594701
Yes, less suffering for yourself.
You have kids, you take care of them and make sure they don't suffer.
People who don't have the wherewithal but still choose to reproduce are truly scum. Your shit offspring, your responsibility.

>>12593642
Based and evilpilled

>>12593642
If you want to cause suffering, you need to be prepared to inflict pain on other people.
Can you do that? Could you handle the sight of a severely injured person you hurt?
Also, would you be prepared to be hurt yourself in the process if someone retaliates?
If not, you're a pussy and don't hate others enough, because you still value your own life.

>>12593371
I love lasagna, and if I were never born I could never eat it. I am glad I was born.

>>12594471
How does existing serve a nonexistent entity?

>>12594715
When is there ever a total absence of harm (not pain)?

>>12593371
then why didn't you kill yourself?

>>12593603
>Absence of pain is "Not Bad" not good.
Explain euthanasia.

>>12594210
based

>>12594804
Tell me why aren't you pouring acid on your ballsack as we speak?

>>12593371
https://youtu.be/PcTzbr-9oMU

I’m not bound to live my life in a rational/coherent way

>>12593371
mate you don't need any argument to live fuck shit and die fuck off with your philosophy

>>12593602
Maybe if you're white :^)

>>12593371
Those are semantic games. The absence of pleasure is just as 'not bad' as the absence of pain.

>>12593630
>>12593642
There is no basis for the separation of reason and feeling to begin with.

Our existence is everything to us. Feeling creates the imperative for how to exist.
Net pleasure is the point of life.

Can you be pro-life and an antinatalist at the same time?
I don't oppose euthanasia however. Your body, your right to live.

>>12598418
>>12598418
>net pleasure is the point of life
grand statements from a guy who wastes his life in front of a screen.

>>12593371
>Changes Abscence of Pain from 'good' to 'not bad'
Ah, now it's perfect

>it's the 21st century and no one compels you to get married and have children
What is your excuse, anons?

>>12598487
My excuse to be a normal fucking human being? Maybe because I'm not an insectman like yourself, that I need to cover up my social shortcomings with ridiculous philosophies.

>>12598487
I'm a homosexual lol I do whatever the fuck I want and no one in society will take me seriously anyways.
Most of ur BS philosophies just don't apply

>>12598523
I meant what's your excuse for getting married and having children. So I wasn't talking to you.

>>12598503
or you ;^)

Fucking hedonists roleplaying as people with morals just kill yourself already if being dead is preferable.

>>12597435
Euthanasia is when the popo kill the bad guys with the shocker

>>12598503
It's not a question whether you or me are normal fucking human being or insectman.
The real question is what our kids will be.
Imagine your child turns out to be like me?
I'll not risk it, so there's no chance it'll end up like me.
You risk it, and there's a chance that it'll end up like me.
But you'd then say "but there's also a chance that it'll end up like me"
Yeah that's what my parents also said and when they saw how I ended up they tell me they wouldn't risk to make if they knew I'd be like this.

>>12598543
I might get married and have children. Sounds nice. Me + my partner are already saving up and we have stable jobs, why not adopt a toddler with no parents? Possible in the future.

>>12598584
Okay, this is about having biological children, creating need where none previously existed. Everyone who is born needs someone to look after them until they reach maturity. Nothing wrong with that.

>>12598609
Aight I guess we could surrogate too but I don't know if I'd wanna pay that much for a child when I can jst get one for free.

A premium just so it can look like me lol. I hope one day I have the money and the ego to do that, it sounds really cool to have little people lookin and acting like you running around.

>>12593371
>Suffering isn't bad
An entire ideology defeated by a single clause

>>12598659
why aren't you inserting a tube full of fire ants into your anus right now?

>>12598647
you're a total piece of shit

>>12596465
When is there ever a total absence of benefit?

>>12594239
Holy shit, goddamn it, why are you so fucking dense? I'm glad I didn't look at this earlier today, what the fuck. I am questioning whether or not anyone knows what they ought to do, whether what ought to be done can be determined based on current circumstances, whether the conception of ought indeed has any validity outside of personal preference or valuation of foresight. In short, I am asking you to DERIVE AN OUGHT FROM AN IS. Prove to me that there is anything beyond mere whim and ingrained empathy and that moral duty is more than a fabrication. If you can't do this, you have no business thinking you have "solved morality." Kant spent most of his adult life trying to derive an ought from an is and he still couldn't do it. Do you think you are really faring any better?

>>12593371
I always think the people that post these threads are trolling because surely no one can be so neurotic and stupid that they'd believe this bullshit but i'm starting to wonder.

>>12598729
I do.
I don't want to have kids, so others shouldn't either.
Why?
Because I said so, now fuck you.

>>12598720
I know that I can't derive an ought from an is, so I am employing other means. Namely saying that if you can't derive the ought from the is in this case then it consistently applies in any other case and you are therefore, at best advocating moral nihilism.

>>12598712
I didn't say that there was, however as a net quantity, when you start dying there is no overall rise in benefit, but a steady decline.

>>12598683
nah I'm an active member of society and seem to get along with everyone I meet.

>>12598546
Being dead =/= never existing in the first place.

One of the reasons existence is shit is because of having to face non existence at the end of the line. Obviously you wouldn't kill yourself, if death terrifies you in the first place, you want the opposite, to live as much as you can.

On the other hand, a lifelong deathly fear is no fun either.

>>12598783
u really were feelin that "lifelong deathly fear" as u were typing that shitty comment huh? as you shit and sleep at night, oh boy sure do I feel that "lifelong deathly fear"

it's just once in a while man stop romanticising all this BS. You don't fear death ALL THE DAMN TIME as your eating your sorry sandwhich in your half hour lunch break.

Yea that's one of the reasons existence is shit. there's a bajillion others. stop with this pseudophilosophy

>>12593371
My dude... Nobody is going to stop fucking. If you have a problem with living, take responsibility for it. But, nothing that you can say will ever convince people to stop fucking. We exist because people fuck and reproduce. Nobody's going to stop that because of 1% of the population who wishes they were dead but can't pull the trigger.

>>12598758
I am advocating sentimentalism.

>>12593371
>pain and pleasure have an universal an equal value

I understand the environmental aspect, but if like sucks so much why don't you kys (I'm asking unironically)

ITT: https://youtu.be/cYOmOEg_nvI

>>12598803
That's fair.
Do you believe people should be allowed to have offspring even if they're unable to provide for them?

>>12596037
Sure, faggot.

>>12598810

Because death sucks even more.

>>12598813
fuck off, whore

>>12593371
>>12594056
Pleasure and pain are two sides of the same coin.
Those that accept and love the pain and woes love life and are the only people worth considering.
These people that are so afraid of potenial pain are weaklings and cowards and they are not worth to experience the highest joys of life. Their life should consist either of eternal pain in the service of their betters or the ultimate death that they crave.

>>12598807
What if the sentiment is guilt at having brought about new conscious life?

>>12594056
Came to post this gem

>>12593371
If you are white and don't have kids, the kikes win and low IQ niggers will replace us all.

>>12599053
Then you would not want to repeat that action in the future. But people who can weigh all of their pain against a moment of pleasure would not have a problem with it.

>>12593371
>reducing human life to pain vs pleausre

Epicurus is that you?

>>12599064
based

>>12593642
>I don't care about what's ethical, and I want to cause suffering.

Then you do care about what is ethical

>>12598783
Nonexistence is superior to existence but you’re too much of a coward to remedy the situation as you see it. Got it.

Why do you impose this idiocy on others hypocrite?

>>12599108
>pain is ethics
lol
it's just chemistry

>>12593604
>STOP POSTING THAT CALCULUS. ITS NOT RIGHT TO SAY ITS "NOT BAD" TO NOT HAVE ABSENCE OF PLEASURE.
Yes it is?

>>12600859
The effect of that chemistry is what you experience as ethics.

Obviously.

>>12593733

This is absurd. If Phenomenal circumstance changes then so do people's principles from which they report their happiness, making comparison useless.

>pleasure and pain
>hedonism at all
Nope.

>>12598906

I noticed that self-purported Stoics and life affirmers do not actually refer to suffering when pontificating but to mere single victories instead of the double or triple ones they're used to. Like merely having a car instead of having the one car you wanted, merely being married instead of owning a live-in slave, merely being rich instead of being a cancerous blight. I noticed that they are by far the most hysterical when faced with actual suffering, i.e. permanent crippling, idiopathic pain, social banishment, etc.

>>12594701
This.
Retarded logic if hyper-utilitarianism beats retarded logic of antinatalism.

>>12598772
A decline that never reaches zero.

>>12594701
>If you are brought into this world you should choose to improve it so there is less suffering.

As monstrous as the question of HOW is, it itself cowers before the question of WHY.

>>12601094
*cut someones arms off*
>suck it up faggot it's just ethics

>>12593371
What retard made this? We have but a short hour to experience pain or pleasure, and an eternity to experience nothing. What wasteful fool, given the choice in their right mind, would throw away experience (which is rare and precious) for nothing?

>>12593371
I agree with you OP, but the only logically consistent step after going full anti-natalist is suicide.

I will have full respect for you only when you kill yourself

>I wish I was never born but I'm too much of a pussy to kill myself
>inb4 "not an argument"
fine, it's an insult

>>12593371
This is wrong though
The correct grapic would be:
>Scenario A (X exists):
>(1) Presence of pain (Bad)
>(2) Presence of pleasure (Good)

>Scenario B (X never exists):
>(3) Absence of pain (Not Good)
>(4) Absence of pleasure (Not bad)

You can't say something *IS* "good" to something that doesn't exist. Everything is nothing to something that doesn't exist.

>>12598418
>Pleasure
I sort of agree, but only in when pleasure is taken to mean an exceedingly broad category of things, like emotionally authentic experience.
Also the "net" idea is silly. There is no calculus of virtue in the face of death, you live a certain way until you suddenly can't experience anymore. The idea that by death you should have tallied up "more" pleasure than pain is ridiculous. In this way life is about experiencing those things which fall under that category of pleasure, pursuing things as defined as personally-normatively (by you) pleasurable; what else CAN you even do with life, the fabric of which is desire?

>>12602124
*cut someone's arms off*
>suck it up faggot it's just chemicals

>>12593371
fuck off anti science leftist just kys

>>12599108
What someone wants isn't the same as what someone thinks is ethical.

>>12593371
This is the true political compass

>>12604278
>pic
my god, just kys

>>12593371
Whatever you say OP

>>12593616
Why do antinatalists think we are interested in actual arguments when all we want is for you to kill yourselfs?

All philosophy is post hoc rationalization of actions you already intended to take.