/lit/ - Literature

kys anti-natalist and spare us your boredom

>It can't be refuted
>Therefore it's true

Is there a name for this fallacy?

>>14573494
>I can't refute it so I'll just ignore it and call you edgy or something if you talk about it
Is there a name for this?

>>14573419
There's no philosophical refutation possible for any of this. If you aren't willing to accept it the only way out is religious belief or self-delusion (which could be the same thing).

>>14573494
>>14573419
>>14573532
I'm not sure what exactly is meant by "can't be refuted," as all arguments rest on assumptions. One can probably take issue with the assumptions of this argument without faulting the logic of it.

>>14573509

>Be atheist edgelord
>Not edgy enough
>Become antinatalist edgelord
>Lul u can't refute me
>Doesn't realize that the flying spaghetti monster rhetoric applies to this as well

>>14573419
>What do you do now?
Do what everyone does.
Fake it until you make it.

>>14573532
Or I suppose you might be able to try and find a different take on it from Eastern philosophy (I recall the mentions of Zhuangzi in Straw Dogs), but that's not something I know much about.

>>14573541
>Flying spaghetti monster
So this is the power of natalist philosophy....

>>14573494
Argument from ignorance

>>14573558

>He doesn't know

Flying spaghetti monster is a parody of Russel's Teapot. Just because it's meme'd doesn't mean it's not a legitimate argument

>>14573540
There is a tendency to view your own ideology as objective truth... OP is a disturbed individual but he has the truth!!! its objective!!! unrefutable!!! hes not a depressed incel or anything

>>14573597
And there we go. Doesn't take long for the lack of arguments to turn into insults. This is the natalist way.

>>14573482
Haven't convinced enough others to follow suit yet, but I will don't worry

It's refuted by the existence of DNA. The will (for lack of a better term) of DNA is greater than the will of the individual in the sense that it persists beyond individuals. The individual merely carries the fire that is DNA, a torch to be passed through generations.
The individual may choose, in spite of all natural urges, to act counter to the will of DNA. The solution to that is simply that such individuals die off and DNA moves around you, forgets you immediately, and continues. Anti-natalism is extremely self-centered and therefore small minded thinking. DNA is beyond any individual or even any single species. But this begs the question—what is the end game?
Perhaps a clue to answering this lays in our ability to even ask such a question at all. By this path which has led to the human species as some us are, and certainly there are disparities among us, DNA has found a vessel by which it is aware of itself not just on a low level of base instruction, but at a level of operation by which it can interact with itself. Think you underlying computer architecture finally having a full operating system with AI that is capable of learning how the machine works as well as finding new ways to operate that machine.
This leads to new possibilities. The machine can now understand and exert will upon the world around itself. It can also exert will upon itself. It can reverse engineer itself and make direct improvements to itself instead of relying on a brute force method where improvements are discovered only by the low standard of not having been annihilated by the elements.
The elements may also lend us a clue.

>>14573419
if your philosophy contradicts simple realities of life (breeding, in this case) it is fundamentally wrong, regardless of how logically sound and consistent the arguments based on the nonsense actually are.

>>14573651

Based beyond based. Some things are just obvious.

>>14573623
Beautiful post.
Inferior DNA drags down the human species and I can't wait for another world war, preferably a nuclear one.
Blood for the blood god

>>14573651
This is your brain on hard materialism

>>14573651
To an extent I agree, but the definition of the term "simple realities" is a pandora's box. Probably highly subjective. Just like "common sense."

>>14573671
>i can't wait for another world war, preferably a nuclear one
beat us to the punch and start by nuking yourself

>>14573674
Antinatalism is a death philosophy, and not even a cool one.
Ever met an antinatalist in real life? They don't even have to say they are, you can just smell their disfunction.
Antinatalists are really just coping with being incels, and doing it in the worst way imagineable.

>>14573540
all arguments do rest on assumptions, but if you claim that "no human suffering can exist if there are no humans" there is really no way to refute this

>>14573623
It seems that the elements of this reality are overtly destructive. Sustained existence can only be maintained through will and ongoing countermeasures to stave off what, as of yet, is inevitable.
And yet DNA has come this far. It has come to a point where the will of the self has the opportunity to leap far beyond whatever path evolution took to get us here and to have a direct hand in our own creation. We have genetic engineering which can inoculate us against aging, weakness, short life span, low intelligence... We are the ones capable of upgrading ourselves.
Think of just one generation of superior humans. Now consider that they will be even more capable, both through superior intellect, longer lifespan, and the presumed growth of technological capabilities over time. Now imagine the upgrades they might be capable of. And so on, with improvements being implemented at an exponential rate.
At some point, a being will come to exist who won't need to procreate because it will be capable of both adapting to the elements and exerting its will so fully over these elements that it will live in as a god in this universe, building it in its own image.
I suppose what I mean to say is that your anti-natalism is premature.

>>14573694
Why?
That'd be completely against my nature and personal believes.
Just because I think you and your families should perish doesm't mean I don't value mine.

>>14573700
checked
>Ever met an antinatalist in real life?
yes, unfortunately, I have met plebbit users.

>>14573700
I hear this criticism a lot, but yet all the most prominent anti-natalists were either married or smashing pussy (Schope) and the most famous "choose life" philosopher was a literal turbo incel

>>14573707
>Humans becoming gods
Do you think this is a cyclical thing or nahh

>>14573623
You could make the argument that anti-natalism is actually the most selfless act if you believe in overpopulation

>>14573419
As you can see, natalists are not capable of discussing this issue and will just insult you. Discussing it here is impossible. Every thread is like this.

>>14573714
I'm not talking about the philosophers though, moreso about the people who actually live out the philosophy.

>>14573651
Is murder a simple reality of life?

>>14573702
That rests on the assumption that human suffering is more bad than human happiness is good. Your assumption is only splintering into more assumptions.

>>14573714
so their philosophy was so gay are retarded that none of them could bear to follow it?

I just don’t get why anyone would be a utilitarian. Do you go through life and just see nothing but immediate value and pleasure as good? Does suffering not enrich you at all? Do you not wonder at the whole horror and beauty of it?

>>14573717
Could be. That whole simulation theory makes sense. Except for the chicken and egg question. Sounds like old vedic texts.

>>14573729
In my experience people who talk about and attempt to live out any kind of philosophy tend to be autists and weirdos

>>14573736
their philosophy was antinatalism, not sexual abstention

>>14573700
>Antinatalism is a death philosophy
>no life = death
how's that air balloon on your neck doing?
>They don't even have to say they are, you can just smell their disfunction.
unlike you pathetic cumseekers, doing dumb things to simply put arbitrary part of your body inside an arbitrary part of another beings body
>incels
ahhhh there it is. you brain is controlled by a vagina so you can't imagine anyone who may even consider not wanting that. anyone who is celibate is such because ha can't have a vagene.

>>14573729
I don't know anyone that would call themselves an anti-natalist
Most of my millennial normie friends don't want kids though

>>14573732

>Considered the biggest transgression a person can commit in all cultures since forever
>Hurr is this the same as having a baby?

Imagine the mental gymnastics you have to go through to think like this. Impressive desu.

>>14573733
no it doesn't.
"There is no human suffering if there are no humans."
this claim doesn't imply anything about happiness or good or bad. it's simply a sentence like "Air is a gas." You can't really disprove the fact that human suffering can only exist if humans exist

>>14573749
Since about 10,000 years, murder and rape was the norm for millions of years before modern anatomical man evolved
Literally saying "we live in a society" is no more fundamentally illogical and contradictory than anti-natalism

>>14573749
Ok let me rephrase it in a way you can understand
Is infant mortality a reality of life

>>14573732
Yes. If you have some philosophy that acts as if murder does not exist of that claims there is never any valid reason to kill then it is nonsensical and unrealistic. Not everything is so complicated it needs a detailed explanation. Human life is to some extend varied and chaotic, and can defy rigid classification.

>>14573717
Oh yeah it would probably be pretty far from human by then too.
>>14573725
Overpopulation is a meme. At best there is an argument for the carbon footprint. If someone genuinely tool issue with the number of humans on Earth then I would expect them to begin with Asia and Africa. They certainly wouldn't begin with places where people have access to food and education while these areas continue recklessly breeding and polluting. If Captain Planet were real he'd be a genocidal racist by today's standards. I don't think most people would feel they have moral justification for that.

>>14573761
Let me rephrase. The statement is correct, no human suffering without humans. The anti-natalist position--"Therefore, we should stop producing children"--does not logically follow from that assumption alone. It requires another assumption--the one I posited.

>>14573767

>before modern man

Imagine applying terms like 'rape' and 'murder' to beings that have no agency.

>>14573743
>not sexual abstention
a necessary fact of life for anyone seriously living out genuine belief in antinatalist doctrine, unless you are simply going to kill any offspring.

>>14573787
and also among humans before settled agricultural societies formed
rape was also accepted and normal in wartime until like 100 years ago.

If you will accept that rape is based and should be legal than that's fine anon, at least you'll be being consistent

>>14573787
What is agency? Crows can murder--no pun intended. Crows also have a social system that punishes murder with execution or exile. Are you saying crows have more agency than pre-modern man?

>>14573783
>Overpopulation is a meme
Just wait till your favorite hiking trail or fishing spot becomes overcrowded with spics leaving trash every where

>>14573797
Are you sure you had sexual education classes at school? You do know it's possible to have sex without impregnating a woman in the current year right?

>>14573797
there's this thing called birth control, and, yes, it includes abortion.

>>14573802
>What is agency
what separates man from w*man.

>>14573779

Lol how is that rephrasing? Nature knocking off children is the same as committing the worst crime a person can commit how?

Nature is brutal, and we use culture to deal with that (yes we live in a society, deal with it).

>in a way that you can understand

You have a very condescending tone considering you are championing a 'philosophy' for edgy 13 year olds, Youssef.

>>14573740
>In my experience people who talk about and attempt to live out any kind of philosophy tend to be autists and weirdos
Absolutely right.
And in the case of people who live out antinatalism, childless.
>>14573748
>Most of my millennial normie friends don't want kids though
Good!

>>14573810
You're thinking of accountability, women do have agency obviously. They aren't just mindless robots

>>14573806
no you admit that antinatalism is completely retarded and even impossible outside of a a society with modern technology? i'm sure a philosophy is naturally correct.

>>14573802

Are you saying pre-modern man didn't punish murder with execution or exile? Do you have a source for that?

>>14573818
No, I'm saying quite the opposite. Read the text chain.

>>14573623

>Some organic molecule contains instructions to replicate itself.
>Because of this it is justified to create more conscious beings that can potentially experiece unlimited suffering.

Can you walk me through this gigantic leap you took between those 2 steps?

>>14573808
antinatalist retards will always argue that it doesn't actually support killing anyone as a defence to those saying to just kill yourself then. yet here you are, suggesting that you should just kill children to support your philosophy. why? because you simultaneously want to say that antinatalism is correct and birthing new children, despite being completely natural and normal, is wrong but that you also can't also be expected to put in the slightest effort to abstain from anything else natural and normal, such as sex. you're lazy hedonists scared by responsibility and nothing more.

>>14573817

What does that have to do with anything? Modern technology changes our view on things constantly. How is that invalidating in any way?

>>14573833
Easy--it's the same gigantic leap you made when you said humans "experience unlimited suffering." What a grotesque exaggeration. There is one hard limit to suffering, which is lifespan.

>>14573744
>how's that air balloon on your neck doing?
No life is just that, no life.
Considered to be dead by humans who are alive.
>unlike you pathetic cumseekers, doing dumb things to simply put arbitrary part of your body inside an arbitrary part of another beings body
It's arbitrary to you because you have decided, or worse, someone told you to not want to propogate your own bloodline.
>ahhhh there it is. you brain is controlled by a vagina so you can't imagine anyone who may even consider not wanting that.
I got 99 problems but a bitch aint one.
>anyone who is celibate is such because ha can't have a vagene.
Either that, or because they have deluded themselves into not wanting to continue their own bloodline for whatever reason.
I'd just call it mental retardation in this case.

>>14573814
no. women do not have agency and are entirely ruled by instinct and emotion.

>>14573842
1) Birth control =/= solely abortion. Use a condom, fucktard. Even then, 2) abortion =/= killing children.

>>14573744
>forgotten or soon to be
What is it you live for? If you don't matter to people, perhaps the only thing in this universe you could matter to (maybe your cat?) then what do you care for the sum of your experience here? There must be something that keeps you from ending it early. What is it and is it merely a form of masturbation in itself to pass the time until the inevitable? Just curious.
I see something greater in myself in others and in my own DNA. It has its own meaning already and it isn't up to me to define it. Although I can see that I have a role in it.
So again I ask, without that fulfilling that role, what are you hanging around for? Death is certainly an option and I am of no perspective to say that one is of greater value im the grand scheme of it all. Just that one has more relative value to me as a human.

>>14573842

>Using contraceptives
>Killing children
>Barely formed fetus is a child
In your homeschooling did they skip all of biology and sex ed?

Also if a mother has absolutely no means of raising a child properly, and it's basically assured this child will have a horrible life, but an abortion could prevent this, isn't there a case for the abortion being more humane?

>>14573853
ironic shitposting is still shitposting, laddie

>>14573844
antinatalism is unnatural to such a degree that it is not possible with modern technology and you actually think it's some correct philosophy of life. lmao

>>14573785
i wouldn't agree that suffering needs to be greater than happiness to justify not making kids since they are not measurable. You don't go around thinking "oh I lost one leg, but I gained 2 hands so yeah, overall it's positive for me".

>>14573812
You say reproducing is a "reality of life"

Saying you can't question reproducing because it is simply something that has happened up until this point is the same thing as saying you can't question murder because it is something that has happened up to this point

>>14573862
>Also if a mother has absolutely no means of raising a child properly, and it's basically assured this child will have a horrible life, but an abortion could prevent this, isn't there a case for the abortion being more humane?
No, because it's 'basically assured'.

>>14573862
You can see all of this retard's posts because he uses reddit spacing

>>14573855
>>14573862
I've already addressed the other reply about birth control. you people are retarded. without modern technology this is your only option, you don't get to ignore that for convenience.

*AHEM*

All retards itt
Pointing out that most (perhaps even all) anti-natalists are bad anti-natalists because they don't actually follow their philosophy to it's natural conclusion is not actually a refutation of the fundamental idea.

If you can't refute the idea, or aren't even going to attempt, please exit the thread. I'm sure you are low IQ energy is needed elsewhere

>>14573785
you need to prove that the vague and broad idea of "suffering" is inherently bad

>>14573805
Unchecked immigration is another matter entirely. 400,000 anchor babies in the US isn't the same as saying there are too many of every type of human on Earth. That said, the black plague wiped out a great deal of Europe and my ancestors thrived anyway. It may not be all bad.
But look how many Chinese there had to be before one of them managed to engineer a couple super babies? Was the chance of that guy coming along better because of the high number of births? The one man with the right skills and the will to carry it out against whatever regulations may have been.

>>14573847
I said potential. If all humans experienced unlimited suffering all the time no one would want to live.
That's not the point of anti-natalism, as far as I understand.

The point is whenever you create a new human you have no means of making sure they won't be extremely unhappy and go through an unreasonable amount of suffering in their life. So how could you make this bet with their life, when they don't get a say in it?

Would any child in a remote village in some poor part of a continent choose to be born in absolutely misery if they had the choice? Would any child choose to be born in an abusive family, even a rich one? Yet every day those same miserable/abusive/etc families choose to have children.

You can extrapolate this argument even to good families who, despite their love and best efforts, just can't really prevent the world from doing harm to their child. Say only 5% of mankind suffers horribly on a daily basis (which I think is a massive understatement). How do you guarantee your child won't be one of those 5%?

Alternatively, if you cannot guarantee this, why would you have that child?

>>14573884
why do you keep saying "without modern technology" as if we -- I mean we who are replying -- live in a world where modern technology isn't easily and cheaply available?

>>14573877
>basically assured
it's not. being poor does not make your life bad and most poors would rather still be alive than never having got to live.

>>14573897
I'm rich and I have told my parents they should not have had children

>>14573887
pointing out the infeasibility and undesirability of something is a completely valid argument against it retard.

>>14573876

They are not the same. Destruction and creation are not the same.

Murder isn't a simple reality of life because if the murdering stops, society is still functional, if the breeding stops however, it ceases to exist.
Now I'm not saying YOU should procreate, from what you've shown in this thread it's probably preferable that you don't. So maybe I should support antinatalism, but only for the gullible fools that fall for that kind of rhetoric.

>>14573884
Why can't we use modern technology to do something that will reduce suffering? Isn't that literally the only thing modern technology is good for?

>>14573848
>Considered to be dead by humans who are alive.
do you consider your unborn child to be dead? no, since to die you must live first
>It's arbitrary to you because you have decided, or worse, someone told you to not want to propogate your own bloodline.
huh? my point was that I've seen people do dumb shit to just smell that moist pussy. pathetic.
>continue their own bloodline
you do know your blood doesn't really flow through your kids?
>I'd just call it mental retardation in this case.
>jesus is a retard
okay anon

>>14573901
No.

>>14573901
not true by the way

>>14573899

Only the relatively rich are snooty and arrogant enough to say that to their parents. When you're poor you're too busy getting by to espouse this kind of nonsense.

>>14573895
because it's a crutch that your philosophy requires for basic feasibility and shows the entitled and sheltered origins of genuine antinatalism, beyond older thinkers discussing similar ideas as a thought experiment.

>>14573806
You still need to begin with the basic biological function of sex which is to procreate. Seeking orgasm is merely a temporary relief from the drive to procreate. As much as this practice may develop into a fanatical fruitless act of perversion, sex is for making babies. You would think an anti-natalist would seek to overcome this root desire instead of allowing it to motivate his decisions. I say go ahead and snip your balls off. See if that helps.
I believe there will still be lingering mechanisms by which these factors still influence you and the only real subversion of the desire for life to go on is to end it all. I don't genuinely want anyone here to kill themselves, but of you're going to be honest about this and follow through, I really don't see another way out.

>>14573887

>The fundamental idea

Which is what? Having children is bad because I hate my parents?

>>14573897
>being poor does not make your life bad
Yes it fucking does you faggot.
t. grew up poor

>>14573899
exactly my point. you're a sheltered, ungrateful manchild.

>>14573903
>>14573890

>>14573923
funny guy

>>14573919
Technology changes how we experience the world. Fire gave us cooking which gave us more calories which gave us larger brains. You would be foolish to ignore that and to regress to a primal state in the name of purity.

>>14573906
BTFO so you resorts to semantics.
Say hi to your grandki- nvm.

>>14573859
>What is it you live for?
well, you can form a ton of meaningful relationships without producing offspring. You can have 0 kids of your own but raise 10 adopted ones.
Personally I teach at a uni and I love it. I've already been remembered by a lot of people and I'm writing stuff. I'd even argue that your life philosophy seems pointless, you can only be directly remembered by those you knew personally and that's very little people. If I write something truly amazing (not lit, but technical text) I may be remembered way longer. That will be my legacy. As well as genes there are memes (not pepes but your contribution to culture) and it shapes a society, not just one diaperboy who may or may not turn to be an okay kid

>>14573922
>You would think an anti-natalist would seek to overcome this root desire instead of allowing it to motivate his decisions
they don't because they are hedonists seeking to justify their simply not wanting children as a brave act of compassion and philosophy rather than laziness or fear.

>>14573906
>>14573942
To add: yes. Jesus is a fag.

>>14573887
Anti-natalism is not an idea. It begins with "anti".
>opposed to; against
You are the one seeking to refute natalism. In your case it seems like a good decision because you are objectively stupid and in my opinion, there are enough people as dumb as you already that it would be a net negative for the rest of us of you reproduced.

>>14573925
NTA. Also grew up poor (under the poverty line, but still always had food and shelter). My life isn't bad. I was still able to experience happiness, friendship, and maturity.

>>14573862

>Also if a mother has absolutely no means of raising a child properly, and it's basically assured this child will have a horrible life, but an abortion could prevent this, isn't there a case for the abortion being more humane?

If a woman can not afford to raise a child why doesn't she stop having sex then? Wouldn't it be more humane?

>>14573700
>Antinatalism is a death philosophy

But it is not against life, only against birth.

>>14573419
https://discord.gg/9FncZd4

>>14573925
then kill yourself? if your life was genuinely bad you would't be here. or are you just to afraid and lacking in conviction?
i and most people would disagree and say being alive and poor is better than not being alive.

>>14573923
>>14573928

Based

Pic related ITT

I feel bad for your parents, especially your mothers.

>>14573419
Why, now you're ready to read Kierkegaard.

>>14573925

My man, can i come and kill you then? Or why don't you kill your fucking self?

Im pretty sure you are better of than not being born at all

>>14573942
>semantics
hmmm yeah it's just semantics man, you killed all the people you didn't conceive hahahhahaha cool maaan.
>muh kidz better than yo kids
your bloodline is nothing special retard, your kid's just a regular human being, not a demigod. it's capable of nothing more than anyone elses kid is capable of.

>>14573922
That constant moving of goalposts.
>Antinatalists can't get laid and are rationalizing.
"Actually they can get laid, they just don't want to have children"
>O-oh yeah? Well antinatalists are hedonists and degenerates then!
"Actually they are not forced to have sex all the time or anything. If and when they do however they would rather it not lead to impregnation. It is not mandatory to chase this pleasure by any means however."
What's the next goalpost?

>>14573968
What do you think will happen when births stop?
Certainly not life, right?
Death it is then.

>>14573978
>>14573982
Don't be daft, killing oneself is not the same as having never been born. Killing oneself is much harder and more frightening.

>>14573814
lol

>>14573940
>conflating the "technology" of fire with industrial technology and manufactured birth control.
nigger are you serious ? banging some rocks together is not technology as the other guys are discussing it any you know that.

>>14573991
how many people will die if no more people are born?
how many will die if more people are born?
Which produces more dead, natalism or antinatalism?

>>14574003

Holy shit I finally get it. It's cowardice, it all makes sense now.
Too afraid to bear the responsibility of bearing children so you make up some mumbo-jumbo about it being immoral somehow. Then when the logical conclusion of the mumbo-jumbo is to kill yourself you cop out by saying it's too scary.

>>14573940
so our experience of the world before modern technology was one where antinatalism didn't need to exist, but now it does? how very convenient and oddly unlike basically any serious philosophy.

>>14573988
>>semantics
>hmmm yeah it's just semantics man, you killed all the people you didn't conceive hahahhahaha cool maaan.
You know I'm right but I'll let you have it.
>>muh kidz better than yo kids
Which children of yours are you talking about?
>your bloodline is nothing special retard,
It is to me.
>your kid's just a regular human being,
not a demigod.
That's correct, what's your point?
>it's capable of nothing more than anyone elses kid is capable of.
That's just wrong though, people aren't equal.
As demonstrated in this thread, antinatalists are less valuable.

>>14573961
they want to stop the natural human acts they don't like, such as having children, and keep the ones they do.

>>14573968
birth is how there exists life

>>14573991

Life precedes birth by all Ontologies.

>>14574021
Your child comes to you one day and says.
"Dad I regret being born. Getting hit by that car/getting this rare disease that wasn't preventable/having childhood cancer is really making me feel horrible. I don't want to kill myself and go to hell or make my family said, but I wish I wasn't born".
Please tell me exactly what you'd say to him?

The argument that anti-natalists are incels/ femcels and ugly autists really doesn't stand up to scrutiny. I'm sorry but the level of asspain that is caused simply because they state they won't be allowing you (collectively) their genes really speaks much louder than your actual words

If anti-natalists were such losers you'd be happy about them not reproducing, yet instead there are daily threads on here of straight seething about anti-natalism.

>>14574055
Id pull out my gun and shoot him in the face

>>14574049

Name a single Ontology by which birth precedes life.

>>14574018
>how many people will die if no more people are born?
Many many more.
>how many will die if more people are born?
All current existing humans.
>Which produces more dead, natalism or antinatalism?
Natalism.
It's also the only one producint life.
You can argue against life and that's fine, but at least dont just talk the talk, walk the walk.

>>14574003
like i said, you're just afraid and lacking any conviction, either in your philosophy or just to suck it up and rope. it's real easy desu. and the outcome is the same: you are not alive.

>>14574051
So you're not arguing against life, but against human life specifically?
That makes it even more dumb!

>>14574072

Not life forms, i.e. animals, life in general.

>>14574061
>If anti-natalists were such losers you'd be happy about them not reproducing,
I am.
>yet instead there are daily threads on here of straight seething about anti-natalism.
We can do both, now end yourself.

>>14574021
You recommend death very casually. You also conflate antinatalism with some kind of death drive. You must be underage.

>>14574062
>Say other people would be bad parents.
>Can't come up with a non edgy shitpost answer.
Almost as if maybe you don't have an argument?

>>14574055
I kill myself for raising such a weak faggot.
let's not pretend as if you antinatalist homos are all survivors of childhood leukaemia or some shit. you are lazy and entitled whiners who think your life is far worse than it is.

>>14574085
I wasnt that guy, i just thought it was funny. Which it was

>>14574079
You dont like life?

>>14574055

At that moment? I would just hug him, and kick myself for not teaching him to deal with setbacks appropriately.

It would however not happen, or just be a edgy teenager phase, because I happen to know a lot more about suffering than you might think, and I would teach my son to deal with it before it happens.

>>14574034
>You know I'm right but I'll let you have it.
how are you right? unborn people are not dead retard, I can't believe that's even something that needs to be mentioned at all
>Which children of yours are you talking about?
>not understanding how green text works
hmmm
>It is to me.
so it's not special, it's regular.
>That's correct, what's your point?
my point is that it's only my view that my potential kids are better than any other kids and that "continuing MUH BLODLIN" is not a valid rational point of ME having kids. if my bloodline stops with me, big deal, humanity will survive (and the same goes for anyone).
>That's just wrong though, people aren't equal.
they are though. maybe not in some unimportant shit thing like "OMG my kid can jump one cm longer than any kid before UOouOUouUOUouO!!!!" what a fantastic achievement. When it comes to anything that matters, anything ever invented was either invented simultaneously by multiple people or would've been invented 5 years later. No one came and reinvented everything out of nothing without prior human knowledge that enabled him to get to there (i.e. newton in a cave would not make anything)

>>14573978
It's a shit predicament to be in, having to choose between:
- the suffering of being poor;
- the grind and toil of getting / staying out of poverty;
- the soul-crushing attempts to cope with poverty through the meme of "mEaNiNg AnD pUrPoSe";
- sucking a tailpipe.

I don't like any of the options presented, and I wish I never had to make that choice.

I will probably end up killing myself, though not until shooting up a bunch of you faggots.

>>14573982
You're free to try, cocksucker. Doubt you'll succeed.

>>14573954
I have no idea how you're supposed be happy as a poorfag. Your idea of happiness must be extremely neutered.

>>14574084

>You recommend death very casually

No I'm not recommending it at all. I'm saying it's the logical conclusion of YOUR rhetoric which I'm saying is nonsense.

>>14574086
>calls other people whiners
>would kill himself over a whiner
you sound incredibly spooked

>>14574103
Then tell me. What exactly would you say to him. What would you teach to him that would make those horrible things good?
Who knows, maybe you have a great answer that will change all of my worldview.
What do you tell to the sick child that is under immense pain and wishes they weren't born?

>>14574065
>Many many more.
>All current existing humans.
MEMEBOY ladies and gents. stand up and clap for this madlad. what a playa, what a playa!!!!

>You can argue against life and that's fine, but at least dont just talk the talk, walk the walk.
what do you mean? I don't have any kids nor do I intend to have any. kinda walking the walk, right?

>>14574063
every new life is undeniable proceeded by a birth. neither simply proceeds the other in some grand overview or life, but we are not talking about the origins of earths living organism. antinatalist talk about births here and now leading to new life which must be prevented. birth coming before life in a narrow, situation specific view is something you believe. your entire philosophy claims it wants to prevent life and thus suffering by preventing the birth proceeding that suffering filled life.
stop trying to divert the discussion of your stupid nonsense to broader topics.

>>14574107

>I have no idea how you're supposed be happy as a poorfag

You learn to budget, and then you find something that gives you meaning. Yeah yeah you said it's a meme but you're wrong.

>>14574084
>You must be underage.
antinatalism is primarily existent among teenagers.

>>14574086
Seems that the question hit a nerve. Try answering it. You'll see for yourself how it is not easy.
Be serious for a moment, and try to imagine answering your child, looking them in the eyes, after they said that to you. What are the exact words you would say? How would you justify their suffering in that moment, and how would you justify to yourself that you had that child in the first place?

>>14574106
>my point is that it's only my view that my potential kids are better than any other kids and that "continuing MUH BLODLIN" is not a valid rational point of ME having kids.
Ok
>if my bloodline stops with me, big deal, humanity will survive (and the same goes for anyone).
Obviously.
But I don't care about humanity at large. i care about my family's health and wellbeing, like any healthy human.
>>That's just wrong though, people aren't equal.
>they are though. maybe not in some unimportant shit thing like "OMG my kid can jump one cm longer than any kid before UOouOUouUOUouO!!!!"
That's quite important for a basketball player.
>what a fantastic achievement. When it comes to anything that matters, anything ever invented was either invented simultaneously by multiple people or would've been invented 5 years later.
It wont be your kid though!
>No one came and reinvented everything out of nothing without prior human knowledge that enabled him to get to there (i.e. newton in a cave would not make anything)
Still, it's newtons law.

>>14574125
I just answered your questions anon.
And congratulations on not having offspring!

>>14574129

One IS preceded by the other. Logically, life precedes birth, not only simply but absolutely.

>>14574107
>the suffering of being poor
you have still never established what suffering is, why it is inherently bad, or why being poor confers some especially horrible for of it.
you just sound like a materialistic faggot now desu.
>and I wish I never had to make that choice.
so you really are just a scared baby lmao
>I will probably end up killing myself, though not until shooting up a bunch of you faggots.
do it then faggot. you'll be the new couch cuck. i can't wait.
>I have no idea how you're supposed be happy as a poorfag
make some fucking friends and pick up a cheap hobby

>>14574116
because i will have been directly responsible for raising one. i could't live with creating something as pathetic as you.

>>14573623
>muh scientism
>muh legacy DNA
Come on.

>>14574138
holy fuck you're such a homo. i'd do what you dad should have done and tell them to suck it up and stop whining. any children i have will not be living any kind of "suffering" just as you absolutely did not. trying actually justifying your gay philosophy rather than dreaming up fantasy scenarios.

>>14574165
so the true way to prevent new life and thus suffering and to end life, which would encompass murder, abortion, suicide etc. if birth does not proceed life than just thinking about births is not the way to enact antinatalist doctrine in any productive capacity, it's against your own ontology even. and it all neatly comes back to why antinatalism is anti life and why you should kill yourself, as antinatalism says life is the start point for preventing the birth of new life. do your part today.

>>14574159
>I just answered your questions anon.
Yes, more people will die if none are born than if more are born. maybe you made an honest mistake when you were writing, but it seemed like a meme answer

>>14574123

What exactly I would say to him would depend on how old he is and what the exact nature of the problem is. I can't just condense years of hypothetical parenting into a 4chan post, it's far too complex for that, I would also be learning as I go along.

However it's been well established that people are only ever content when they are working towards a goal, and that goal depends on where you are. Let's say you were hit by a car and will need years of physical therapy to walk again, do you blame your parents for giving birth to you or do you put in the work and work towards the goal? Which of the two ways of approaching the problem has the highest likelihood of producing good results?

The main problem with your logic, I think, is that it's very Sylvia Plath. You need to have the highest ideal right now (no suffering, purpose, being rich, whatever) and if you don't it's all not worth it and you might as well not exist. If you view the world/yourself in such a way, then yes life will always be bad, because everything is bad compared to a hypothetical utopia.

>>14574199
You're just another person that perpetuates suffering. You think your child wouldn't suffer if you told them to just suck things up? You also want to convince me you're not suffering, even if you suck things up yourself?
Have you ever been to one of those old people retirement homes, or were close to old relatives on their last days? A lot of the "suck it up and stop whining" men, once broken enough by life and their biology, eventually become just like the "whining" child and start begging not to have been born.
I used extreme cases of diseases hoping at least then you'd show some empathy to this hypothetical child, because I already imagine that for most natalists any other kind of suffering is just "whining". Still you couldn't find an ounce of empathy in your heart.

>>14574222
I literally said natalism causes more death, which is what you were fishing for you moron.

>>14574216

My point being that antinatalism is not against life at all.

>>14574241
>Let's say you were hit by a car and will need years of physical therapy to walk again, do you blame your parents for giving birth to you or do you put in the work and work towards the goal?
I put in the work because I already was born and now I have to make the most of it and indeed chasing goals is a way of making the most of it, but at the same time I wish I wasn't born so I wouldn't have to go through that in the first place. I don't think these two ideas contradict each other.

>>14573419
Dude, I am an antinatalist but how the hell was David Brainletar what finally pushed you into the philosophy? Even Carrera, another antinatalist debunked the asymmetry argument. I don’t think its important to try to prove life is sonehow fundamentally bad. The issue is one of consent. If you cannot get the consent of someone potentially being entered into the contract of life, then you have no right to proceed to force them into that contract. Simple as.

>>14574258
Kek

>>14574144
>But I don't care about humanity at large. i care about my family's health and wellbeing, like any healthy human.
I agree, but I can have a family by adopting kids. Why have more new kids? I can help some poor kid and raise him as my own.
>That's quite important for a basketball player.
sure, but basketball player, not really an important human being on the grand scale of things
>It wont be your kid though!
first, scientific success comes from 99% hard work so by adopting a kid and raising him to be a hard worker and achieve something is way more of an achievement for me than cuming into a female and her giving birth and then me not doing anything and him becoming great on his own. people should stop being proud of "their kids". be proud of your own achievements not someone else's.
>Still, it's newtons law.
It is, but not because of his fathers sperm. He'd probably be as successful if he was adopted at birth and raised the same way he was. we'll never know, but probably. Also, If it wasn't him, someone else would discover it, so nothing important would be actually lost, maybe slightly postponed, but why should that matter.

This entire thread has convinced me all antinatalists are just pubescent morons experiencing their first existential crisis.
>Waa life is suffering I didn't agree to this!
>You're evil and propagate suffering if you have kids!
>No I won't kill myself, that's just stupid!

>>14574252
no you didn't, but i guess you made an honest mistake. i thought it was a meme

>>14574243
again, not explanation of why suffering is bad or what about this situation causes it.
you have zero depth, like your whole belief system.

>>14574304
antinatalist: I don't want to have kids
natalist: WHAT? YOU FUCKING MANCHILD HOW DARE YOU!!!!!!!

>>14574258
yet your own arguments contradict you. kill yourself faggot
>>14574252
it also causes life. and "natalism" is not a thing, normal people do not a need a cheap philosophical reason to procreate.

>>14574330
If suffering is not bad, why do people complain about it, seek to fix it, pray to god to make it stop, etc etc?
One could even argue that suffering being bad is a biological truth because it drives adaptation, the main pillar of natural selection. Evolving is finding ways to avoid suffering. Suffering less starvation, suffering less threats, etc.
Even the most pious people in the world that think suffering is rewarded later still pray when something really makes them or a lot of people suffer.

>>14574191
Cum on yourself

>>14574301
>I agree, but I can have a family by adopting kids. Why have more new kids? I can help some poor kid and raise him as my own.
You could.
>sure, but basketball player, not really an important human being on the grand scale of things
He is to his parents.
>first, scientific success comes from 99% hard work so by adopting a kid and raising him to be a hard worker and achieve something is way more of an achievement for me than cuming into a female and her giving birth and then me not doing anything and him becoming great on his own.
Why wouldn't you just do everything you just said but with your own kids?
Literally a cuck.
>people should stop being proud of "their kids". be proud of your own achievements not someone else's.
You can do both.
Also, I bet you wouldn't say this to a father's face.
>It is, but not because of his fathers sperm.
Newton JR wouldn't exist without daddy newton.
>He'd probably be as successful if he was adopted at birth and raised the same way he was. we'll never know, but probably.
This is a nature vs nurture argument.
I am on natures side.
>Also, If it wasn't him, someone else would discover it, so nothing important would be actually lost, maybe slightly postponed, but why should that matter.
Because it didn't happen that way?

>>14574337
Actually, it's more like:
>Antinatalist: I dont want kids and people who do are selfish!
>Natalist: I want kids, see you in hell.

>>14574337

More like

antinatalist: Life is hard fuck you mom and dad!
natalist: Grow up faggot

>>14574378
Mine was bad.
>>14574379
This one is better

>>14574348

I myself have not read any arguments that can ascribe to life itself the suffering that antinatalists want to abolish, and maintain that their arguments are awkward precisely because it can only be ascribed to birth.

>>14574264
>now I have to make the most of it
why? you aren't going forth to raise children and if your life is so miserable and filled with suffering you clearly don't have any passion to live for, you're just bumbling around whining about your parents making you rather than actually making a good life for yourself like most people would go do.
>but at the same time I wish I wasn't born so I wouldn't have to go through that in the first place.
you can stop having to go through that right now as you would actually want to if your life was genuinely miserable. but you won't you're either a coward or just making it up, probably both.
>I don't think these two ideas contradict each other.
they do. "oh i'm already alive so i have to continue to be alive even though i don't want to be" is not sound at all. why? you should just kill yourself. if you don't want to then thats fine, but you still need to admit you're afraid to die and thus do want to live.

>People ITT actually using the term 'natalist'

The word is normal. Natalist is like saying cis or neurotypical. The word is normal.

>>14574325
>Which produces more death, natalism or antinatalism?
>Natalism

It's not that hard you know.

>>14574378
>>14574379
Actually it's more like
>Antinatalist: I think having kids without guaranteeing them a good life is immoral.
>Natalist: HAHAHA I WOULD BEAT THE SHIT OUT OF ANY LITTLE BITCH THAT WAS THIS WHINY LOLOLOLOL SEE YOU IN HELL BITCH btw this is totally the morally upstanding good stance here.

>>14574415
Most of human genes get bottlenecked at some point so I wouldn't call it 'normal'.
I think healthy is a better fitting description.

>>14574418

That's like saying the primary cause of car crashes is cars. It's true but still a super autistic and useless way to approach the problem.

>>14574428
Literally noone can 'guarantee' their children a good life you moron.
Parents strive to give their children the best life they can.
Your realization that you're not up to the task isn't one I have a problem with bythe way.
I have a problem with antinatalists projecting their own flaws on healthy humans.

>>14574409
Can you guarantee to me that whatever suicide attempt will not be botched AND that there is no punishment in the afterlife?
It's literally the only case in which you have a point. The above question is what keeps a seriously sizable portion of the population from killing themselves immediately.
Until there is a serious answer to the question above one should strive to lessen the suffering in ones life, as well as the suffering of others. All of your positions, despite you claiming to be more morally upstanding, only increase suffering ("suck it up you little bitch!", "just fucking kill yourself and go to hell!", etc)

>>14574443
That's exactly what I was arguing.

anti natalists are cowards disguising it with fake concern if a 10/10 bimbo jumped out of their closet and begged to have their kids watch how fast they make a heel turn on their stupid philosophy

>>14574428

>without guaranteeing them a good life

Moving the goalposts. What is a good life? One free from suffering? I suffer and I have a good life. Quadriplegics can have good lives. You suffer less than a quadriplegic but there are still quadriplegics who have good lives while you seethe in your basement. In fact from what I can see most of your suffering is probably derived from you adopting this retarded rhetoric.

>>14574362
>He is to his parents.
but so is the one who can jump 5 cm less. Parents love kids no matter what so what's the point, he could be a hunchback of notre dame and you'd love him if he was your kid.
>Why wouldn't you just do everything you just said but with your own kids?
why would I? what's the benefit? I am capable of loving people who didn't shoot out of any of my body parts. Secondly, many kids are born into extreme poverty, why not "save" one of them. He'll live the same life as my potential bio kid, but there will be one less kid suffering (therefore less suffering and equal amount of happiness in the world).
>Literally a cuck.
Not sure you understand the meaning of either words you just used, but I wouldn't obtain a kid by someone filling my wife with sperm. I would get it from two completely separate people.
>Also, I bet you wouldn't say this to a father's face.
hmmm. I said it to my dad if it counts. Personally, I hate it. He puts a target on my back which I don't need. Let my deeds speak for myself. This way, him always shitting about how good i am, every error i make is doubled. And what for?
>Newton JR wouldn't exist without daddy newton.
no, but daddy newton could've adopted a kid instead and raised him the same exact way and he would be probably the same (science is in the nurture, not nature)
>I am on natures side.
well, we disagree I guess and I don't think there's point in arguing about that. I'll only say that even if it is like that, still, leibniz invented calculus at the same time as newton. My original point is that a person can not do much on his own. Even those "geniuses" were that only because of those who came before them. If it was not newton, 2 years later you'd have someone else doing what he did.
>Because it didn't happen that way?
what? what is your point? mine is obvious, nothing important would be lost in the long run, it would've been invented anyway. world doesn't ask an individual for a permission to turn

ITT: Shitty future parents trying to justify unnecessary suffering.

>>14574415
>most people use standard terminology
>me, a dumb retard not knowing standard vocabulary am superior

>>14574461
>Can you guarantee to me that whatever suicide attempt will not be botched
Only if you actually want to succeed
>AND that there is no punishment in the afterlife?
Noone knows but in my opinion it's unlikely.
>It's literally the only case in which you have a point. The above question is what keeps a seriously sizable portion of the population from killing themselves immediately.
No, that would either be the will to live, or pure cowardice.
>Until there is a serious answer to the question above one should strive to lessen the suffering in ones life, as well as the suffering of others.
Or you know, you can suffer for good things.
>All of your positions, despite you claiming to be more morally upstanding, only increase suffering ("suck it up you little bitch!", "just fucking kill yourself and go to hell!", etc)
Dont say mean words ! :( !
Grow a pair
Nevermind you wont use them anyways

>>14574494
nature plays a part as important as nurture, let's see you try to nurture a gorilla into an engineer, the most youll get is something like koko

>>14574418
yeah, just skip over the text IN THE BIG FUCKING RED BOX
no, you're not a fag at all

Reminder that creating a kid instead of saving one can not be justified unless thinking your worthless low-middle class genes have any worth.

>>14573419
Nietzsche.

>>14574358
people want to overcome suffering because it sucks and they don't like it. the reality, though, is that suffering provides a certain level of not quite meaning but something like that to life, maybe purpose though not in a grand religious kind of way. having purpose through absolute obstructions that must be challenged is the natural state of man. when we lack something like that is when most people experience misery from pointlessness. i think antinatalists immaturely conflate the two. what they are experiencing is the misery given by an easy and struggle-free life. every one of them i have met in person has been directionless, which is not necessarily the fault of them or any specific people but rather the society they were born in. by your idea of suffering our current suffering is this empty misery and almost no one knows how or has the conviction to fight it.
i genuinely think the antinatalists in here should read both stoic literature and maybe some uncle ted for perspective on suffering and struggle.

>>14574520
Let me ask you, did you really not understand my post or are you just memeing?

>>14574512

>Fringe ideological group trying to cast the rest of humanity as if they were on equal footing by using an inorganic made-up term in an attempt to legitimize their movement.

Yep, standard terminology.

>>14574522
reminder that if you let some anonymous faggot on an anime imageboard influence your own percieved worth/worthlessness youre only spreading faggotry

>>14574443
why? I'd agree that cars produced nothing of ACTUAL value to the world as well. as is with all technology in general. and it's all because of cumbrains. OH WE HAVE NEW TACHNOLOGY, will we in our current number live like gods... OR!!!!... will we procreate to the point where there's way more of us and we're as miserable as we were before that technology? society always picks latter, fucking retards.

>>14573623
DNA doesn't give a fuck about anything and your lame attempts at boxing it into a metanarrative reek of pathetic human hubris

>>14574397
thats the who point. if it is life that proceeds and leads to birth then antinatalist are contradicting themsleves in claiming not to be anti life or by pretending that combating life is not a valid part of antinatalism, largely because they are not genuine in their adherence to the belief. if life is the start then it makes sense to also stop the cycle at life, which includes ending your own.

>>14573419
If mankind continues to exist and study genetics, neuroscience, and cybernetics, it will eventually be possible to reform humanity into a kind of being that can be lastingly happy and doesn't need suffering to justify its material goals. These positive humans can continue to advance and live happily well-past the utilitarian break-even point vs people gradually ceasing to reproduce now. If you wanted a concrete goal to work toward, that's a candidate.

>>14574517
>gorilla
yeah, great point, I couldn't turn you into an engineer
but since you mentioned it, and I told you I teach, I actually teach at an engineering school and trust me, ANYONE can become one, they just need to spend their whole day learning. anyone can get to a good life if they spend most of their time trying (and ofc if they have someone paying them when they are still in education)

>>14574475
It's interesting how everyone here seems to be impervious supermen. Are you immune to suffering? You're now telling me "well there's quadriplegics with good lives".
In other words, there is literally nothing that could happen to you that would make you regret being born, right? Literally no amount of suffering in the world could make you bend your knees and say "damn, yeah maybe this is too much for a person to bear"?
In that case yeah I guess you're strong and I'm weak. I'm not willing to put myself, or anyone for that matter, through that kind of ordeal. I don't see any way to justify it.

>>14574514
>No, that would either be the will to live, or pure cowardice.
It's literally untrue. Suicide is less common in deeply religious people with suicide idealizations precisely because of the idea of a punishment. It's not too far out there to think this became a part of religions specifically to discourage suicide and make it less frequent.
Grow some empathy.
Nevermind you won't use it anyway.

>>14573419
Pessimism is wrong, life isn't suffering. Don't mistake your feelings with a universal human condition.

>>14574537
it's older than antinatalism

>>14574494
>but so is the one who can jump 5 cm less. Parents love kids no matter what so what's the point, he could be a hunchback of notre dame and you'd love him if he was your kid.
Yes, and still dad is proud that his son jumped so high.
>why would I? what's the benefit? I am capable of loving people who didn't shoot out of any of my body parts. Secondly, many kids are born into extreme poverty, why not "save" one of them. He'll live the same life as my potential bio kid, but there will be one less kid suffering (therefore less suffering and equal amount of happiness in the world).
I'm very sceptical of your claim that you'd be able to love anothers child like he was your own, but maybe you could.
It's not something I would personally bet on.
I also dont think hapiness and suffering are easily calculated like you just did.
>Not sure you understand the meaning of either words you just used, but I wouldn't obtain a kid by someone filling my wife with sperm. I would get it from two completely separate people.
I think you got my point though, didn't you?
>hmmm. I said it to my dad if it counts.
Not really..
>Personally, I hate it. He puts a target on my back which I don't need. Let my deeds speak for myself. This way, him always shitting about how good i am, every error i make is doubled. And what for?
Your dad doesn't like to see you err, like any normal parent.
>no, but daddy newton could've adopted a kid instead and raised him the same exact way and he would be probably the same (science is in the nurture, not nature)
Seems like a lot of unneeded trouble, and daddy newton agrees with me on this one.
>well, we disagree I guess and I don't think there's point in arguing about that. I'll only say that even if it is like that, still, leibniz invented calculus at the same time as newton. My original point is that a person can not do much on his own. Even those "geniuses" were that only because of those who came before them. If it was not newton, 2 years later you'd have someone else doing what he did.
I don't think i'd disagree with this.
>what? what is your point? mine is obvious, nothing important would be lost in the long run, it would've been invented anyway. world doesn't ask an individual for a permission to turn
Except for mr. Newton ofcourse.

>>14574551

Precedes birth, but not necessarily leads to it. I am inclined to think that birth is, in fact, a blight on life.

>>14574461
killing yourself is not difficult, quite making excuses and just admit it scares you because you want to live. your life is so bad and miserable largely because you have trapped your thinking with the retarded filter of antinatalism.
>The above question is what keeps a seriously sizable portion of the population from killing themselves immediately.
no isn't you fucking moron. they want to live and feel they have more to still do in life thus are afraid of dying.

>>14574566
yeah great just because the schools inflate the grades to heaven so pajeet who cant tell the difference between his ass and his code can get a CS degree doesnt make him as good as carmack. I dont think youve ever seen the inside of a college classroom if your honest opinion is anyone can be whatever they want if they try hard enough. Youre never going to beat usain bolt in a footrace is that due to nurture too? fuck outta here you dimwit

>>14574570

No I'm not saying that at all. Sure there are people that suffer so badly that the rest of their lives bleaks in comparison, I'll concede that. But that's not the norm, and not having kids is not going to solve that problem either.

>>14574592
>life isn't suffering.
ooooh i love going to work and slave away for 8-10 hours EVERY fucking day until I die. especially in this time and era where (at least my) country just says "oh well, no money for pensions, you old fucks should die even though you spent 45 years slaving away and producing 5x what you got"

brilliant life mr. jew, way to show yourself

>>14574508
your parents were "shitty because they didn't hit you enough when you complained about mundane bullshit.

>>14574591
>Grow some empathy.
For suicidal people? Why?
>Nevermind you won't use it anyway.
Not on suicidal people I wont, that would be ligitimizing their pathologies.
Which I wont.

>>14574532
You keep going for this fallacy of the "teenage phase" antinatalists when the very first post in the thread has adult philosophers, that had different degrees of struggles in their lives (and there's many other ones to look up), that you just willingly want to refute.
Plus you get a bunch of Hypocrites like Nietzsche who argue for this kind of "overcoming everything with your own two hands" and then die miserable, ill, neurotic and with all kinds of issues when he can't fit his words with his reality.
In all likelihood you are not stronger than any average person, you just haven't suffered anything that shook you thus far so you think everyone else is just whining.

>>14574517
there was a guy who trained his pet monkey to operate his railroad switching station because he himself was disabled. not relevant to the topic, but i thought it was neat.

>>14574522
it can be justified because i want to and my genes have worth by virtue of managing to pass them on.

>>14574632
>ooooh i love going to work and slave away for 8-10 hours EVERY fucking day until I die.
You dont have to
>especially in this time and era where (at least my) country just says "oh well, no money for pensions, you old fucks should die even though you spent 45 years slaving away and producing 5x what you got"
Why didn't you anticipate your own retirement?
>brilliant life mr. jew, way to show yourself
Ah, now I get it.

imagine being an organism that has succeeded in reproducing since the dawn of time just to see your lineage potentially end not due to war famine or disease, but because your faggoty descendant got it into it's head that it's too cool to reproduce, millions of years of surviving tooth and nail, blood and sweat, all gone, like tears in the rain.

>>14574686
I dont want to imagine, is that ok?

So where does the instinct to get pissed off at depressed/nihilist/defeatists, come from. I understand in immediate situations with family or friends who you can't get through to, but why with strangers?

There's so many of you guys in this thread, but like has insulting and yelling at a depressed person ever worked in your experience?
Did someone, especially a stranger, being a rude asshole to you help you out of a bad place once?
And what does it matter to you if some no-count stranger is stuck in a bad place? You already believe in something that makes your life worth living, and it would be understandable if you wanted to compassionately pass it on to someone, but not so much if you want to yell at them for not already sharing it.

So like legitimately, what's the angle?

>>14574603
>Yes, and still dad is proud that his son jumped so high.
so your point is that you could adopt a kid and you'd be proud of him as well, whatever his achievements
>I'm very sceptical of your claim that you'd be able to love anothers child like he was your own, but maybe you could.
why not? People love their dogs, let alone another being that you raised and taught how to do everything. I know some people who adopted (mainly because they couldn't have their own kids) and they love their kids, of course they do. You love your friends
>I think you got my point though, didn't you?
no, are all the people working in orphanages cucks? no one is getting "the horns" in this situation.
>Not really..
okay, but why would I hesitate saying that to someone? It can be annoying, now none of my friends have kids, but if they start with that shit no one cares about, i'll be sure to ridicule them as I said I would "cool, let him brag, you didn't do nothing, you just made him, he's all mother"
>Your dad doesn't like to see you err, like any normal parent.
what? no, he brags about my achievements to his lads
>Seems like a lot of unneeded trouble, and daddy newton agrees with me on this one.
daddy newton, stop with this cringe naming ffs
>Except for mr. Newton ofcourse.
wtf are you talking about? your point is "mr newton"???? or what? there would be no progress without him? Except leibniz did what he did in maths and hooke did what he did in physics.

>>14574686
Imagine the same scenario but it's a big volcano instead. Both about equally likely to wipe out humanity forever.

>>14574708

Intellectual laziness. If you can denounce everything as meaningless you don't actually have to consider specific ideas.

t. Former cynic

>>14574708
sir this is an anime imageboard. If youre looking for a support group why are you here? Go call the suicide hotlines, no one here has any obligation to pamper you.

>>14574708

>Did someone, especially a stranger, being a rude asshole to you help you out of a bad place once?

it helps translate sadness into anger, which is helpful since it allows me to externalise rather than internalise, and fixate on the flaws of others where i'd otherwise fixate on my own flaws.

>>14574708
>So like legitimately, what's the angle?
Accellerating the process!

>>14574686
>but because your faggoty descendant got it into it's head that it's too cool to reproduce
I'm guessing you mean not

>millions of years of surviving tooth and nail,
billions anon, billions. But I would imagine they would "think" of it as a defect in out nature or a mismatch of instinct and natural habitat. Luckily for them the have many descendants

>>14573419
>Read Benatar, Popper, Pearce, Zapffe
>"Oh shit this hasn't actually been refuted, has it"
Admittedly I haven't read these yet, however I highly doubt the anti-natalist world view is anyone but the depressed types who pretend to wish they weren't born but don't kill themselves

>>14574726

it's not so much about life being meaningless as there having never been such a thing as meaning to identify the absence of.
that said, i don't think people are getting worked up about life's meaninglessness.

>>14574723
imagine thinking death to things outside of your control is the same as choosing of your own freewill to end it all.

>>14574711
Have sex

>>14574646
this thread already went over them. most philosophers are not necessarily thinking of things as a prescription for life, more as a thought experiment, and some are simply hypocrites. you also may simply not succeed after trying. philosophers are still just people trying to understand life, not infallible or necessarily correct. nietzsche can be wrong too.
>In all likelihood you are not stronger than any average person,
no, i'm not, but you are weaker.
>you just haven't suffered anything that shook you thus far so you think everyone else is just whining.
becuse people have gone through shit far worse then your unremarkable sheltered life still like living and go on to have children. they don't complain about the suffering of their horrible life on the internet instead of doing something about their life. you are a weak, whiny faggot. most of us are capable of noticing the kind of people filling the ranks of antinatalism, and you're virtually all manchildren or literal children.

all antinatalists are hypocrites faggots or cucks prove me wrong. If the perfect girl begged for their seed and they said yes, hypocrite, if no then faggot, if they try and deflect that someone else can fill their shoes then cuck. What a horrible philosophy to subscribe to.

>Religious people in this thread: Procreating is good, and suicide sends you to hell and eternal suffering. If you really dislike suffering why haven't you killed yourself yet?
Why do you do this?

>>14574708
it comes from being repulsed by intentional weakness, by the pathetic.

>>14574708
>So where does the instinct to get pissed off at depressed/nihilist/defeatists, come from
their own lives feel meaningless and so they push that view onto the world

It is a sucky situation

>>14574624
>youre never going to beat usain bolt in a footrace is that due to nurture too? fuck outta here you dimwit
no it isn't. usain bolt cam out of his mom's pussy running under 10 seconds. he didn't train a second in his life, that's him, 100% natural. also, what is actual real world application of that? what? My life is gonna depend on the fact how fast can I run a 100? 12 seconds is not fast enough, I need that 9,3 or whatever? no one cares about that lame shit in the real world.

no, I'll guess you either never went to college or are still in one. It's simply a first step for most engineers and you leave school with a ton still to learn and usually genius means nothing, hard work is 99% of engineering, like it or not, you'll figure it out eventually (i hate that, but what am i gonna do).
and if your vision of "a good engineer" or "a good anything" is the absolute top of the list, you're gonna be very disappointed kid, because that is no fun at all. Better the person is at his work, less life he actually lives.

>>14574775
The perfect girl for an antinatalist would not beg for their seed. They would just beg for their cock.

>>14574781
>>Religious people in this thread: Procreating is good,
Nah, just me doing it is just fine. Not religious bythe way.
>and suicide sends you to hell and eternal suffering.
I dont believe this.
>if you really dislike suffering why haven't you killed yourself yet?
Well?
>Why do you do this?
Because it's a ligitimate question.

>>14574800
since when was my argument it was all nature? Im not an extremist faggot like you, but Im glad I was able to get you to admit nature plays a role alongside nurture.

>>14574708
>And what does it matter to you if some no-count stranger is stuck in a bad place?
they aren't just stuck in a bad place. most are not even in a bad place to begin with, actually. but its the idea that you should just complain and do nothing that puts people off. they pretend to be suffering when most are sitting comfortably in their home spending hours on an anime imageboard like the rest of us who are at least capable of admitting that we are not suffering in some unbeatable way, many even knowing exactly how to improve our life but lazily not. antinatalists don't even understand that much.arguing for some nonsense ideology to shift any kind of blame away from yourself is going to make you unlikable.

>>14574800
also nice look bellitling the accomplishments of others just because it doesnt align with your world view, Im sure all the athletes out there really loved having you as a teacher, how full of wisdom you are, you lazy fat piece of sour grapes shit.

>>14574802
>antinatalist
antinatalists are people that don't want the responsibility of children. They then try to make it some philosophical view to justify their choice to people

>>14574831
>arguing for some nonsense ideology to shift any kind of blame away from yourself is going to make you unlikable.
This.
This is why I am a strong advocate for social exclusion and assisted suicide regardless of age.

>>14574662
>You dont have to
enlighten me as how to not work. I am listening.
>Why didn't you anticipate your own retirement?
What the fuck? are you this fucking retarded? I know people who had a ton and lost it all. They had 2 apartments, state took it because "he has no need for 2 apartments because he's one man and no one can live in two places" (literally, it's not a joke, communism boy). Then the war came, his other apartment destroyed. Money he saved changed and he was in a few years left with nothing, from a rich person to a nobody. It's not as uncommon. It's just your fucking western world "everything is beautiful" shit.
>Ah, now I get it.
yes, you live in the top 1% of earth's population and you tell others that they didn't anticipate, what exactly retard? famine, war, corruption?

>>14574802
then they could watch their childless cat mom gf age and get more and more depressed as she inevitable becomes infertile and guzzles a bottle of SSRIs <3

>>14574759
All of these words are empty. I am alive the same as you. As for sheltered or not, it's useless to go over that line since we don't know each other. I don't know what you do for a living, what kind of illnesses you faced, what kind of losses you had in your life.
Most of your argument hinges on this desperate belief that you are stronger than me and that a "strong" person like you could never come to my world view through sufficient setbacks. You're free to make that bet with your life all you want, I just argue that it's not very fair to make it with the life of others (i.e. your children)
You can repeat the sheltered life argument as many times as you want. It does not refute what I'm saying even one bit.

>>14573419
ablooo hoo hooo wahhhh if people sad then why live wahhhh i'm a big fucking baby who can't deal with being alive ergo nobody else should have to either wahhhh

>>14573602
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOO THAT'S NOT AN ARGUMENT!! YOU CAN'T JUST INSULT RETARDS ON THE INTERNET!! WHY WON'T ANYONE DEBATE MEEEE???!!!

>>14574859
>>14574866

Yes.

>>14573419
Just kill yourself then? Seriously. Why not just kill yourself?

>>14574726
So you're in the "yes it has helped me in the past" category cool.
>>14574728
I'm not looking for support, just curious what you feel like you/anyone is getting out of this. But if it's just general "I'm on the imageboards, I gotta get in some pissed-off arguments," I totally get that. It just strikes me as a specifically weird thing to get heated about.
>>14574730
Interesting, thanks.
>>14574739
nice, carry on.
>>14574788
You sound real tough.
>>14574794
Right, but it's not a particularly appealing view. I would think ignoring it would be self-evidently not a correct view to anyone who didn't already share it. Maybe not.
>>14574831
Gotcha, I think. So it's like any other, "I don't like this guy, so I'll yell at him." Not to diminish that mindset, it's pretty normal for any topic, I don't know why I would have guessed this one was different.
>>14574854
yeah, I don't think I disagree. People deserve control over their own lives far enough to associate with just whom they want and die if they choose.


Well anyway, looks like it's a plurality of reasons. Thanks for indulging me.

>>14574861
no, i'm arguing you are particular weak compared to everyone, there is a difference. kill yourself, actually improve yourself, or just stop complaining about having some horrible level of suffering that we all know absolutely is a lie. using some second rate philosophy as an emotional crutch should be intensely embarrassing for you yet here you are.

>>14573419
Hope is better than despair.
Evolution will remove humans from the equation one day, only by continuing in a moral fashion, can we shape the future to be better than it was for humans.

>>14574888
checked
they are cowards who need to justify not killing themsleves with "anti-natalism"

>>14574888
Checked. They won't answer. I'd genuinely like to know.

>>14574858
>enlighten me as how to not work. I am listening.
Call boss
Say:
I no workie
>What the fuck? are you this fucking retarded?
Yes
>I know people who had a ton and lost it all. They had 2 apartments, state took it because "he has no need for 2 apartments because he's one man and no one can live in two places" (literally, it's not a joke, communism boy). Then the war came, his other apartment destroyed. Money he saved changed and he was in a few years left with nothing, from a rich person to a nobody. It's not as uncommon. It's just your fucking western world "everything is beautiful" shit.
Bad stuff happens now I get it.
>yes, you live in the top 1% of earth's population and you tell others that they didn't anticipate, what exactly retard? famine, war, corruption?
There is nothing new under the sun and those who fail to prepare WILL suffer.
Regardless if it's because of their own shortcomings or the things you listed.

>>14574888
They want to be refuted.

>>14574905
>You sound real tough.
no, i'm just a normal person with a functional sense of disgust.

>>14574750
Depending on what you value, there's more dignity in choosing the time and place of your death, if it's a guarantee. I wonder if the ancient ancestor you mentioned would have spent his time differently if he foresaw the volcano one generation away instead of a thousand. It sounds like your argument comes down to subjective values, which is a fine way to live life, but not a good way to convince people who don't already share them.

>>14574933
check'd
ベース

unless youre posting from within a north korean death camp, the very fact that you have access to the internet and some method of posting here shows how good you have it in life compared to most of this planet, those starving african children with bloated stomachs should get the chance to eat the face of whoever bitches about their miserable lot in life on this mongolian basketweaving forum

>>14574905

>So you're in the "yes it has helped me in the past" category cool.

No I'm in the "I used to think I was a lot smarter than I am but I've grown" category.
This is why people accuse you of thinking like an edgy 13 year old, because some of us used to be edgy 13 year olds and we can recognize when someone hasn't grown out of it.

>>14574925
>>14574921
>>14574888

Just read the thread. Basically it is:
1 - Threat of afterlife punishment. Can't know if you'll go to hell and suffer even more.
2 - Thread of your body failing you at the last second and you botching it and becoming invalid
3 - Not having access to surefire suicide methods.
4 - Having an instinctive aversion to self harm that can't simply be overcome by thinking hard enough about it.
All of these factors easily explain a person that wishes they were not born, but don't wish to kill themselves. Every suicidal person in the world that has not commited suicide has one or a combination of those.
I doubt you'll answer to this post anyway.

>>14573740
Yep.

>>14574850
>accomplishment
look I can run faster than you, but it's only visible if we run at the same time because the difference is not visible by a naked eye otherwise and this has no actual application in the real world, nor does it make it better in any possible way.
hmmm sure
>Im sure all the athletes out there really loved having you as a teacher, how full of wisdom you are, you lazy fat piece of sour grapes shit.
I never once talked about sports with them, why would I, I don't teach sports. If they know what they need to know and show up when they need to show up, I don't care. same goes the other way around, if they can't do what they need to pass class, they fail. Choose, sport or uni if you can't do both. And also, it aligns with my world view, I love sports, I've been injured a few times as well, but still, you need to choose in life, you can't expect to do everything and others will lift your weight.

>bellitling
yeah, how dare I say that it's absurd to pay a footballer more than someone saving lives.

My point was that if your arguments are that "MY KID WILL BE GOOD AT SPORTS" you all are retarded. Who the fuck cares? Most parents want their kids to play sports mainly to develop a healthy lifestyle and to gain friends and learn to play with others.
Nature plays some role, ofc. but that is extremely minor compared to work ethic. In sports, in science, in music, in anything.

>>14574933
What part of "anti" do people not understand? They are the ones seeking to refute natalism.

>>14575000
They want to get rid of a dilemma they have, rules be damned.

>>14574927
hmmm soooo your point is that life is suffering? it seems like that from this post. Yet your first post was all against that. I'm glad you figured it out

>>14574986
Not sure what there is to answer in your post when I was asking the question to begin with. I don't have answers. Have you tried natalism?

>>14575017
I guess I should've made myself more clear then.
Life isn't JUST suffering.

>>14575034
that's true, of course. It just depends what you wish to focus on. And like you said in your previous post, if you don't prepare you'll suffer. To prepare, you need to expect the worst, i.e. you need to be a pessimist

>>14574977
Wait, so you're doing this with the specific experience that it didn't help you fix your mindset, then? I wasn't trying to talk down to you, just assuming that you had personal experience with something like this "snapping you out" of your edgy-13-ness.

Anyway I don't think my personal opinion is that edgy; people lead different lives, some are happy and some aren't, and only they know. I don't (think I) personally know anyone who has turned their life around due to being angrily criticized for their defeatism, but like I say, people lead different lives. Maybe there's someone here like that and I hope to hear from them if so.

>>14575047
>that's true, of course. It just depends what you wish to focus on. And like you said in your previous post, if you don't prepare you'll suffer.
So we agree on this.
>To prepare, you need to expect the worst, i.e. you need to be a pessimist
I disagree with this though, I think you can be an optimistic realist and prepare for the worst, still.

>>14575058
>I don't (think I) personally know anyone who has turned their life around due to being angrily criticized for their defeatism

We're not doing it to help you. This is 4chan. We like to call retards retards.

>>14575058
>I don't (think I) personally know anyone who has turned their life around due to being angrily criticized for their defeatism, but like I say, people lead different lives. Maybe there's someone here like that and I hope to hear from them if so.
When I expressed my suicidal thoughts to my father when I was 25, he got furious, drove me to a hardware store and made me buy a rope, then drove me back home to explain to my mom what I was planning to do with it.
It gave me the perspective I needed.

>>14574986
killing yourself is not hard kif you are serious. they don't seem like very religious people.
it is all just cope.

>>14575000
natalism is not a philosophy. its normalcy.

>>14573419
>negative utilitarianism
lowest common denominator imaginable

>>14575076
and just think they come here to get laughed at all on their own! It's like a restaurant where the food serves itself.

>anti-natalism
Define and prove the existence of suffering without God

>>14575076
Alright, cool. So it's just regular imageboard anger. I at least get it. You're probably just entrenching your argument partners, but if it's not about convincing them, then it's no biggie. Also, I'm not someone who has a stance on what other people should do with their lives.

>>14575092
holy shit, that's an impressive, possibly risky, move. I'm glad it worked out. I'm curious though, what kind of conversation leads up to you, at 25, discussing an intention to kill yourself with your dad?

>>14575140
me hurt oww no good. fee fee owie no good. me ouchie all time.

>>14575063
>optimistic realist and prepare for the worst, still.
I guess you could, but with optimism comes more spending usually (in my experience) and more money is spent on stupid useless things. But hey, if you can make it work

>>14575156
>I'm curious though, what kind of conversation leads up to you, at 25, discussing an intention to kill yourself with your dad?
Fucked up mindset due to unemployment.
I feel quite useless when I'm not working, although it's not as bad as it used to be.

>>14575178
Being optimistic about my life and financial situation doesn't make me more frugal personally, but you're right, I guess for a lot of people it does work like that.

>>14574888
because I want to kill you first :)

>>14575230
totally hear ya there, struggling to find employment is a special kind of demoralizing. It sounds like you come from a pretty loving family, all things considered. Lucky guy.

>>14573419
Pearce as in Pearce who ?

>>14573419
Salamu 'alaykum, imbecile

(i) Anti-natalism is true
(ii) If anti-natalism is true, then reproducing is morally unjustifiable
(iii) A propagator of anti-natalism must have come into existence, i.e., reproduction must have taken place
(iv) (ii) and (iii) contradict
(vi) Therefore, anti-natalism is false.

Dostoevsky was right when he said the people that suffer the most are those with large levels of intelligence and deep hearts because all the natalists ITT seem to have never truly suffered a day in their lives. For such a counterculture crowd of people, you all seem to have the same boomer and normie sanctity of life pussy worshipping mindset of "grow up pussy that's just how life is life is great."

>>14574686
Imagine being such a cumbrain animal slave to entropy to think muh ancestors matters

>>14575553
I'm sure anyone who is wasting hours of their day posting on an imageboard is suffering greatly. grow up or rope up.

some people are followers, they cling on to other ideas and then reach out with clamming fingers hoping to drag others with them, examples:
>homosexuals
>religious radicals
>revolutionaries
>militaries
>corporations
>sciences
>philosophies

fewer people are leaders, they learn from an early age through observation and personal loss that the world that people make is rather strange and exists mostly in their own head as a story they tell themselves to avoid loss or observation or personal experience. they-we choose this world of illusion appearance and story because it is more comfortable and requires less conflict resolution than the alternative which will often lead to tragedy and horror. examples of leaders are:
>salespeople
>investors
>politicians
>criminals
>designers
>engineers
>gamblers

the interaction between leaders and followers is exciting and dynamic. followers sometimes lead and leaders are forced to follow due to an economic, religious, technological or cultural paradigm, we are living through one right now. when enough leaders become followers an equilibrium shift occurs, where the follower-leaders are incapable of leading and lose control gradually due to having insufficient follower-followers underneath them, then the leader-followers become leader-leaders and there is an uptick in either growth or death relative to the centuries around this systemic shock period.

the system itself remains because it is man made, as a way to deal with the tension between people who DO and people who SAY.

>>14575839
to clarify my position:
anti-natalism is a radical homosexual revolution funded by corporations and sciences and girded by philosophy. the only thing it really lacks is a military to enforce it. the reason it fails is because it's people are not natural leaders, they cannot sell the idea or show how to profit from it, they cannot use it to inflame the populous or make it dangerous and illegal thereby attracting the young, cunning and poor, they cannot build it into the future or show a proof of concept behind it and ultimately they lack the instinct and desire to win, so they never risk anything they wouldn't gladly lose on it.

when followers try to push ideas they only attract other followers, and very quickly they are desperate for any type of leadership, because without a leader they sit corralled in their idea space, incapable of moving. the mass of humanity will always need an inhuman elite, which can light the way forward and mark the trail ahead.

>>14575553

For someone who adheres to such a fringe ideology you sure have trouble understanding the views of others.

Why is it to hard to accept that some people would have preferred to never existed ? What's so special about this shit?

>>14576164

Because it's an incomplete thought and if you were honest with yourself for longer than 30 seconds and really thought about it you would realize that it's basically meaningless.

It's also cringeworthy because only the sheltered and the relatively well-off think like this and think it has any real bearing. It's like fedora tipping but at least atheism has some merit in that it does away with restricting dogmatic beliefs.

>>14576182
>It's also cringeworthy because only the sheltered and the relatively well-off think like this and think it has any real bearing.
This but the literal opposite. Only those who never truly suffered would even think about having children.

>>14576203

So you're implying none of your ancestors eve suffered? Do you realize how supremely retarded that is?

>>14573579
Yeah, but you’d have to be an insane retard to think it applies to this.

>>14573597
Correct. No need for the sarcasm.

>>14577207

It obviously does. When you claim something can't be falsified Russel's Teapot is obviously applicable.

>>14573700
Get your brain out of airplane mode and come back with actual arguments. Do you know why the “cope” thing is a nigger meme? Because only niggers are stupid enough to think coping is bad. Coping is very good. If nobody learned to cope they’d all commit suicide.

>>14577220
Not unless its the existence of some entity.

>>14576227
No, but I realize how supremely retarded they were.

>>14575435
Absolutely retarded. Antinatalism’s validity being based on the existence of antinatalists? You went full utilitarian.

>>14575877
Take your meds, you schizophrenic idiot. If any powerbrokers were trying to promote antinatalism do you think it might at least appear in a dictionary or be recognized by a spellcheck program?

>>14573874
gained two hands? as in had two legs, no hands, traded 1 leg for 2 hands?

>>14575839
>leaders don’t follow philosophies

What brand of glue do you huff? Elmers?

>>14574107

money doesn't buy you happiness faggot. if you can't find it now you won't find it when you have more numbers in your bank account.

quit being so shallow.

>>14577227

>Russell's teapot is an analogy, formulated by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making unfalsifiable claims, rather than shifting the burden of disproof to others.

You made that entity thing up, faggot. Stop posting.

>>14573671
Everyone hating on inferior DNA till it's their DNA on the chopping block

>>14573651
This is incredibly uninformed.

>>14574708
Life affirmation is just cope, that's why you're mad.

>>14573419

I take it this is a thread about existentialist philosophy and nihilism or about something similar. So my question is: Should I read Kierkegaard before or after Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, Sartre, Camus and the rest of them?