/lit/ - Literature

>>15849615
based, but it's better not to post this here. brainlets incoming

>>15849615
I’m an ethical egoist, so never

>>15849615
As if you had the choice to pass on your ugly genetics

>>15849615
13, then i grew out of it

>>15849615
Based book but The Conspiracy Against the Human Race is a more rational thesis.

>>15849615
16 but i grew out of it when i converted to islam

>>15849615

15 but then I lost my virginity

>>15849660
Ligotti sucks dicks and is fake deep.

>>15849615
They are even right from the Christian perspective

>I know some who grumble and say: If all were to abstain from procreation, how would the human race continue to exist? Would that all wanted to abstain! provided it were done in love, from a pure heart, with a good conscience, and sincere belief, then the kingdom of God would be realized far more quickly, since the end of the world would be hastened.

St Augustine, City of God

>>15849615
i was 25 when i figured out that antinatalism is the logical, natural, and final conclusion of philosophical naturalism

>>15849680
oh no no no no
seems like you are still hurt from the penetration of Ligotti's reasoning

>>15849615
minus one year

25 or so. I've studied some different traditions and especially Vedanta helped me swallow the anti-natalist pill. In fact I realized anti-natalism is the same as moksha, and escaping from the wheel of Samsara which is the un-ending cycle of birth and death. Obviously the only way to escape from being born and from being subject to death is to never beget children. All lifeforms are constantly reproducing when they are controlled by instincts... That is why it is said that all lifeforms are constantly progressing through Samsara while the final goal of the whole process is to escape out. That final goal is moksha, there's no exact word to translate it into the English language.

They are internally inconsistent to begin with.

>>15849809
how so?

>>15849615
>waaah life sucks i should never have been born im getting a vasectomy
>*the world is taken over by salafi muslims, amish, haredi jews, laestadians, etc. who have 8 kids each*
lol owned

>>15849917
>avoiding pain is good
>avoiding pleasure is bad

>avoiding pain is neither good nor bad
>avoiding pleasure is neither good nor bad

Pick one.

>>15849920
kek the absolute state of western incels

>>15849615
12 I guess. I was really into linkin park at the time.

CRAAAAAAWLIIIIIIIIIIING IN MY SKIIIIIIIIIIIIN, THESE WOUNDS, THEY WILL, NOT HEAUUUL

FEEEAR IS HOW I FALL, CONFUSING, WHAT, IS REAUL

>>15849928
>Pick one.
why?

>anti-natalist
>still hasn't killed himself
lmfao, anti-natalism is literally self refuting

>>15849937
the guy who wrote these lyrics was sexually abused multiple times in his childhood and probably because of this trauma he killed himself.
only assholes take these lyrics as a meme.

>>15849963
>telling other people to kill themselves
that's very life affirming of you

>>15849973
I'm not an anti-natalist, I do not encourage suicide.

>>15849943
the anti-natalist mixes and matches those premises and becomes inconsistent. For example:
>avoiding pain is good
>avoiding pleasure is neither good nor bad
I could just as easily say that avoiding pleasure is bad, or that avoiding pain is neither good nor bad.

>>15849615
I'd almost say the problems we face today come primarily from people not knowing how to have a proper family unit and live out the most basic of human inclinations.

>>15849981
read this >>15849963 again you're literally telling people to kill themselves

>>15849920
Antinatalists living easy for not forcing their kids to suffer in this shithole existence.

why don’t anti-natalists kill as many people as possible?

>>15849986
Anti-natalists are not saying that avoiding pain is good.

>>15850010
Because why would they? It's both illegal and immoral.

>>15849990
No I'm not. I'm pointing out that anti-natalism is self refuting. If you're an anti-natalist and posting on 4chan, you're demonstrating that anti-natalism is wrong. If living is so horrid that it's better to never have been born, then you'd want to immediately kill yourself to end that awful, horrid, excruciating pain.

But you're still alive, which means that your continued existence is actually more pleasurable than it is painful, which means that living isn't inherently bad, ergo there's no reason not to breed, because the entire argument (you're just introducing another person into the pain of the world) falls apart, because you've admitted (by your own actions) that life is more pleasurable than it is painful.

I'm fully against suicide, and I don't think people should do it. Your not having done it is proof that anti-natalism is a crock of shit. I'm glad that it's a crock of shit, otherwise foolish people like you might take their own lives for no reason.

>>15849615
Once when I was 12 I had an abrupt insight where anti-natalism suddenly seemed to make sense. Seconds later the feeling vanished, and I realized that I had been hit in the head by a football and was momentarily retarded.

>>15850016
>Anti-natalists are not saying that avoiding pain is good
yes, they are. That’s how they justify non-reproduction. Otherwise the point creeps in that life can be more pleasurable than painful, at least for the majority of people, and therefore more good than non-existence, which is neither good nor bad. So they arbitrarily label non-existence as good.

>>15849986
It’s easy for you to say, which doesn’t actually make it mean anything substantive.

Avoiding pleasure is neutral, whereas avoiding pain is a necessity, or at least becomes a necessity the more severe the pain becomes.

Honestly, most of the ‘arguments’ against antinatalism always sound like they come from people who have no real experience of pain or deprivation.

Either that, or they’re parents themselves (or parents to be) desperately flailing at logic in an effort to refute a position that personally offends them.

>>15849987
But Al-Ma'arri was born in 10th century anon

>Abul ʿAla Al-Maʿarri (Arabic أبو العلاء المعري Abū al-ʿAlāʾ al-Maʿarrī, full name أبو العلاء أحمد بن عبد الله بن سليمان التنوخي المعري Abū al-ʿAlāʾ Aḥmad ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn Sulaimān al-Tanūẖī al-Maʿarrī; 973–1057)
>Described as a "pessimistic freethinker", Al-Maʿarri was a controversial rationalist of his time, citing reason as the chief source of truth. He was pessimistic about life, describing himself as "a double prisoner" of blindness and isolation. He attacked the dogmas of religion and rejected Islam. He was equally sarcastic towards the religions of Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians. He advocated social justice, and lived a secluded, ascetic lifestyle. He became a strict vegan, writing "do not desire as food the flesh of slaughtered animals."[2] Al-Maʿarri held an anti-natalist view, in line with his general pessimism, suggesting that children should not be born to spare them of the pains of life.

Reminder that not a single anti-natalist has ever been able to give a proper answer to why they haven't killed themselves.

>>15850031
Anti-natalism means we should not beget children because being alive is worse than to never have been born. That's all really. Anti-natalism does NOT mean:
>We should all kill ourselves right now
>I want to kill myself
>I want to kill other random people.

>>15850039
is non-existence good or bad? And to what extent? How great must the difference be in pleasure and pain for a life to be more preferable than non-existence? Or is life never justified if it has an ounce of pain? How do you define good anyway?

>>15850050
>being alive is worse than to never have been born
If that is the case, then how does an anti-natalist justify not killing themselves?

>>15850060
It's a stupid, immoral and pointless and messy activity.

>>15849920
Yeah, and my non-existent children won't have to suffer through the shithole existence of living in the third world country my nation (America) will eventually become. Your children, on the other hand will be raped by niggers everyday. Must feel good to be a Chad who can get laid.

>>15850050
Better question than killing:
You're saying that people should not beget children, but you aren't taking any measures to stop them. Why are you letting them make more children?

>>15850073
I am taking measures to stop them, by telling people about the doctrine of anti-natalism right now at this moment.

>>15850050
Right, exactly as I said: if non-existence is better than existence, then the logical solution is suicide. But, by not committing suicide, you demonstrate that existence is better than non-existence.

>>15850049
would you contemplate their stance if they did?

>>15850087
it’s not an intellectual stance, but an emotional one. You can’t be an anti-natalist if you prefer being to non-being on an emotional level.

>>15850084
No, that is not a logical solution. Because suicide affects only the individual. We are not egoists. We don't want what's best for only our own individual selves. That's why we talk to other individuals and inform them about anti-natalism. That's the moral thing to do.

>>15850072
So then it's not at all about life being pain and suffering, it's literal actual cope because you're an incel. You know you can fix that, right? Hit the gym.

>>15850049
>>15850060
someone who wants to look into suicide has to look into the horror of death and murdering themselves. Death is the most horrific prospect of being alive in the first place. and most of the people lack the balls to end it.

>>15850098
So then you agree with me that extistence is better than non-existence, hence why you continue to exist. In which case, you're not an anti-natalist at all, because you've openly admitted that existence is better than non-existence by actively attempting to continue to exist.

So YOU are actually the one going around telling people to kill themselves.

>>15850112
No, i don't agree at all.

>>15850109
so if you could press a button that killed you painlessly at random within the next year, you would press the button, right? Also, would you use the button to kill everyone else?

>>15850123
So then you're going to kill yourself? I kindly ask you not to.

>>15850083
You can't stop people with pretty words. That's like saying you can be swayed by words by themselves. But that's at least an attempt, and I'll accept that.
Another question:
How do you feel about adoption?

>>15849615
The fact that most people aren’t anti-natalists shows that it’s a subjective position at best. It may be the case that not reproducing is moral FOR YOU. Don’t tell me what to do

>>15850112
Why are you so full of shit? Are you capable of anything like abstract thought? Are you so obtuse you must have every argument spelled out for you in the simplest terms so you can’t distort them to suit your position?

No, it doesn’t follow that existence is better than nonexistence. It follows that as long as continued existence is to some degree tolerable, then for most people it is preferable to the trauma associated with self-inflicted death.

>>15850124
I'm repeating myself, I know, but Anti-natalism is not about wanting to kill anyone. So why are you confused? Anti-natalism means that non-existance is preferable to existance that's all. For example if you think vanilla ice cream is better than chocolate ice cream that does not mean you want to annihilate all the chocolate ice cream in the universe.

>>15850133
Well, no. As i've said a few times now. Get it through your thick skull yet, retard? Haha.

>>15850134
Adoption is OK with me, i don't see any moral qualms with adoption from the standpoint of anti-natalism. Adoption is a means of acquiring for a person a new set of parents, not necessarily father and mother of the person in question. It's attested in many traditions...

>>15850124
no, because mum would be sad. after the death of my parents like Albert Caraco sure.
>Also, would you use the button to kill everyone else?
no i believe in morality and consent

>>15850154
>Anti-natalism means that non-existance is preferable to existance that's all.
then it follows that non-existence should be maximized, such as by killing all humans. Are you confused?

>>15850167
Wrong. That doesn't follow. Learn 2 logic.

>>15850154
>Adoption is OK with me
Badass. It's okay with me as well. Last question:
Why is suicide bad? Before you reiterate its messiness or that it's unnecessary, keep in mind that the chaos of life itself is immeasurably messy and unnecessary compared to falling off a roof for a few seconds.

>>15850167
You are a bad faith bullshit artist who isn’t worth engaging with on any level.

>>15850179
Suicide is immoral for the same reason that murder is immoral. It is morally equivalent.

>>15850153
So then what's the point of anti-natalism? If you accept that existence can be better than non-existence, then you have no reason not to procreate as a rule, because you admit that there are certain instances where breeding (natalism) is totally fine, and in fact should be done.

So how in any way, shape, or form are you an "anti-natalist"?

>>15850154
So then what's the point of anti-natalism, if you fully admit that life is worth living and is better than not living?

>>15850173
>>15850181
not an argument

>>15850181
there are natalists who think like this. Why not fulfill your moral duty and persuade people to antinatalism?

>>15850192
>life is worth living and is better than not living

To that I would answer; It is better not to be born, than to be born. You did not choose to be born. But what you can choose, is whether or not to beget offspring. So herein lies your possibility of choice, and the possibility of enactment of the doctrine of anti-natalism.

>>15850154
>the guy advocating other people, but not he, commits suicides calls someone else a retard
lmfao there's a reason the cool kids throw you in lockers

>>15850210
So you're not actually an anti-natalist at all, you just argue that there are certain instances where people shouldn't breed.

>>15850210
>It is better not to be born, than to be born.
why?

>>15850192
Again, I didn’t say existence is better than nonexistence.

I said continued existence can be preferable to the trauma of dying, including the pain and possible complications suffered by yourself, as well as the possible harm it can cause others who depend to some degree on your continued existence.

>>15850207
>Why not fulfill your moral duty and persuade people to antinatalism?

I'm not him, but I'm pretty much doing that by shitposting on this thread right now. Good solid, high quality 4chan exchange of ideas.

>>15850213
That episode doesn't bother me any more! I've fogriven you John, you were simply the Chad and i was the virgin. Some archetypes appear over and over again in this universe.

>>15850219
>you just argue that there are certain instances where people shouldn't breed.

I wouldn't agree with that, My position is that not begetting offspring is the mark of the superior man. From there on out we can deduce the rest of my philosophy, if I may use that word.

>>15850221
In as short an amount of words as possible; Because being in the state of earthly existence, that which we call "life", is a lower state than mutliple other states to which the being (the self) is able to attain. I hope you understand the general principle which I am explaining.

>>15850243
>I hope you understand the general principle which I am explaining.
not at all

>>15850233
So then you admit that the pleasures of living outweigh the combined pain of dying and the pain of continuing to live. This means that you accept that under certain cirucmstances, continued existence is better than non-existence. Thus, you admit that you accept that there are certain instances where a child could be born and its continued existence would be preferable to it than its non-existence.

So then, again, you aren't an anti-natalist, because you aren't arguing against natalism at all, you're just saying that people should be more thoughtful in their natalism, which you hold, as you have admitted, to be a good thing (because you accept that there are instances where natalism does not result in life that would be better off not existing).

>>15849917
Their asymmetry argument, even if we'll accept it, at minimum leads to natalism being good in many cases and at maximum to the world being infinitely good.

>>15850250
The self is what "You" are. To me, it is the "I". It is the "I" of every living creature. Now, you must admit that You were not always what we call "Alive". You were, before your birth here on this earth, not alive. That means you had not yet attained to this state, the state of being born here on earth, in a human body.

So we must by logic conclude that it is possible for the "I", which is you in this case, to occupy different states. Okay, that's all i wanted to say. After that point onward, it is possible to explain that different states exist in a hierarchy, where some states are better than others. Now this ties into Anti-natalism, in the sense that Anti-natalism purports that the living state, that which we call "being alive", is a lower state, disagreeable and situated below other states in the afore-mentioned hierarchy. Have you heard of similar notions before?

>>15849615
>How old were you when you realised that the anti--natalists are right?
0 years old. I was actually still swimming in the Ineffable One when I made the conscious choice to never be born. Didn't work out in the end.

>>15850267
No, I believe continued nonexistence is preferable to coming into existence in the first place.

But having been forced into this state, continued existence can be preferable to the potential traumas associated with dying.

>>15850291
obviously because a no-thing cannot be said to be "better" than an existing something, but I'm sure the author realized that when he chose that title

>>15850285
ok so now try to explain why it’s better to not be born

>>15850294
To merge your awake-ness, or consciousness, with what you call the "continued nonexistence" is surely the same as attaining to what the Hindus call Brahma-Jnana.

>>15850294
Jumping out of the high place is very easy, accessible to almost anyone and leads to quick and almost guaranteed death.

>>15850190
You know, as much as I dislike antinatalism, I think you have a healthy mindset about it. I'm still going to have children. Whether I find a good woman and we make them or whether I find a good adoption agency and fill out paperwork for them, I'm going to be a father. Knowing that you value the life we already have makes mine a little brighter; I think more people should value life, including their own.

>>15849615
u guys just need to eat more meat

>>15850294
So then if you admit that non-existence is preferable in all instances to existence, why are you still here?

>>15850317
Yes, I’m well aware.

>>15850327
the idea is that non-existence is preferable unless you exist

>>15850327
you straight up didn't read his second line

>>15850330
So if you think that inexistence is good, you have a perfect way to achieve it. And if you think that it is bad - welcome to the club.

>>15850315
You would avoid the pain of dying, and disintegration of the physical body, having never entered into a physical body in the first place.

>>15850319
If you must take a wife then so be it. It would be preferable for you not to. Even as i write this, I am aware that I myself might eventually beget children one day. The sexual lust is strong, but not irresistible as proven by many ascetics.

>>15850348
>You would avoid the pain of dying, and disintegration of the physical body, having never entered into a physical body in the first place.
you would also avoid pleasures

>>15849688
St Augustine's words aren't God's words, I think the vast majority of christians would strongly disagree with antinatalism.

>>15850360
Yes, but those are pleasures of the flesh, pleasures pertaining to the physical body. There are also other forms of pleasure exclusive to other states, or other "bodies", we might also say.

>>15849615
The only people who should've never been born are troglodytes like you who believe in these non-philosophies.

>>15850333
Well that's awfully fucking convenient. It sure is nice that the guy going around telling others to kill themselves because life is shit gets to continue living, and deciding who gets to live and die, and who gets to be born and not be born.

>>15850333
Yeah I did, he just said that continued existence is worse than non-existence. If that's the case, the pain of dying is irrelevant, because it's less than the pain of existence.

If it's about individual morality, then the point is also moot because you're choosing non-existence for a person yet to be born, which means that they can't choose, so it's inherently immoral.

>>15850348
>the sexual lust is strong, but not irresistible
You've got me all wrong. If/when you have children of your own, you should have those children because you are going to love them. Not want to love them or need to love them, but simply that you will love them no matter what. You could adopt. You could get in a relationship and have tons of sex and still adopt. You could change your mind completely and procreate. Whatever you do, anon, make sure that if you have children you never stop loving them. That's my two cents.

>>15850374
Well even Jesus says its better to be a "eunuch" than to marry and have kids. Not having kids is always the ideal, but most people can't live up to it

>avoiding pain is good
>avoiding pleasure is neutral
wrong, wrong, wrong.

A) A man says to you, “you were about to be eaten by that shark! But I shot it.” Everyone would agree this is good
B) A man says to you, “your lottery ticket was the winning ticket, but I shredded it and threw it away!” That isn’t neutral.

Antinatalism is only valid if the pain outweighs the pleasure, and this can hardly be proven, especially for everyone.

>>15850383
that has nothing to do with non-existence. If you don’t exist there are no pleasures

>>15850414
The pain always outweighs the pleasure given a full life timeline.

>>15850403
>you're choosing non-existence for a person yet to be born, which means that they can't choose, so it's inherently immoral.

Why is it immoral exactly?

>>15850408
I contemplate your use of the word "love". It seems that love has a different quality depending on who it is directed towards. In my case I would want to say that I love God more than I love any children of men, and that is a good reason not to beget children.

>>15850421
>If you don’t exist there are no pleasures

Can you explain how you came to that conclusion?

>>15850414
>Antinatalism is only valid if the pain outweighs the pleasure

I will always argue against such a point. And the reason is simple; Because what is "good" does not necessarily need to take into account either pleasure or pain.

>>15850424
That does not follow from the asymmetry argument (and, if true, will work even without that argument, so it is purely useless).

>>15850424
maybe for you
>>15850442
because it’s obvious
>>15850447
try explaining yourself instead of speaking in riddles

>>15850403
How much bullshit are you guys capable of spouting? Honestly, it’s shocking how much you just blatantly lie and distort to defend your positions here. Says a lot about the strength of your supposed ‘convictions’.

I ain’t the one telling other people to murder themselves, shit4brains. You clowns are the ones crawling out of the woodwork to tell anyone who doubts the goodness of life and the ethics of childbirth to go kill theMselves at every opportunity.

Holy shit your arguments suck. A nonexistent person can’t choose whether they’re forced into a life of want and struggle and pain? Oh boo fucking hoo, are you SERIOUS?

To think I used to give the opposition the benefit of the doubt. Reading the arguments here has done more to convince me of the necessity and truth of antinatalism than any exposure to antinatalist thought ever has.

>>15850431
>I love God more than I love any children of men
I'm not a Christian, but from past conversations, I think that's how most Christians view their love priorities. God, then family, then friends, etc. It's possible to love God more than your children and still love your children very much. But I'm a heathen and my family comes first in my monkey mind.
I'm satisfied with our conversation. Thanks for being cool with me.

>>15850466
Since you can easily go back, but don't want to, you are the actual hypocrite.

>>15850462
"Because it’s obvious" is not a very good argument, lmao...

>try explaining yourself instead of speaking in riddles

When someone calls me out for "speaking in riddles" I always take it as a compliment because that would liken me to Gandalf, who also had to endure the same accusation. And Gandalf is based.

>>15850473
Thanks and God speed Anon.

>b-but the trauma! I don’t want to kill myself
interesting that antinatalists are scared away from their paradise of non-existence by a few seconds of fear and pain. I would go through 1,000 suicides if it meant I would return to this life with a noticeably improved physique or mental ability. So why are antinatalists so adamant if they aren’t even willing to put a bullet through their heads? It doesn’t seem like that much of an issue then

>>15849615
13. I saw that all people are just people, social relationship is just illusion, talking, and there are too many people already. those who breed new children do it for their own entertainment, out of boredom.

>>15850490
>I would go through 1,000 suicides if it meant I would return to this life with a noticeably improved physique or mental ability

Have you ever considered the notion that maybe you are mentally ill? I'm not saying this to be mean.

>>15850466
>gives a retarded argument
>others point that it is retarded
>wow, you are rude, i will now agree with that argument!

>>15850504
Antinatalist speaking of mental illnesses is a fun sight.

>>15849963
why should I kill my parents child?

>>15850504
ad hominem. You can ignore that I said that if you want and actually address the point. Non-existence must not be that special if a few seconds of pain prevents you from achieving it.

>>15850431
You're condemning someone to non-existence against their will, how is that not immoral? That's murder minus the pain. If I could kill you instantly without you feeling a thing, would that be moral? Of course not. More importantly, given that anon has accepted that existence is better than non-existence (or not? He's not quite sure apparently, he's switched back and forth a few times) you're denying someone the better status of existence compared to non-existence. We could say "Well, they don't exist yet, so who cares?", and that would be valid if the crux of the argument wasn't
>it's immoral to breed because that would be dooming a person to exist when non-existence is better
so the sheer fact that we're arguing about this AT ALL is a demonstration that it can be immoral or moral. If the question of introducing life into the world or not isn't immoral or moral, then the entire argument is moot.

If you claim existence<non-existence therefore don't breed, then you accept the validity of existence>non-existence therefore breed.

>>15850466
It's pretty clear that you haven't thought this through. You've switched your position on this several times. Is existence better than non-existence? Is non-existence better than existence? You're not quite sure. That's okay, there's no harm in not understanding things, but you're advocating a philosophy that promotes suicide. What if it turns out that existence is better than non-existence? How would you feel, knowing that you going around demanding people kill themselves because life is shit had done so because of your misguided ideas?

>>15849625
>>15849928
>>15850037
>>15850053
>>15850096
>>15850124
>>15850147
>>15850167
>>15850414
>>15850490
antinatalistm refuted

>>15850482
>still hasn’t explained it
why aren’t you fulfilling your moral duty? Uh oh, I still wanna have children. Better stop me!

>>15850544
WOAH
go publish these genius arguments in an academic philosophical journal

>>15850563
Centuries later /lit/ will be studied as a golden knowledge repository.

>>15850524
Another idiot who doesn’t understand how words work.

YOU are the ones advocating that antinatalists commit suicide. Not the antinatalists. YOU assholes. READ THE FUCKING THREAD.

YOU are the ones misrepresenting the antinatalist position and arguing in bad faith. Trolls, basically. Have fun with that.

>>15850580
that’s because you don’t know how to say “existence is preferable to nonexistence if and only if you have been born, in most cases.”

>>15850580
>here is my position (which logically leads to suicide)
>your position logically leads to suicide
>how dare you force me to suicide!

>>15850524
>it's immoral to breed because that would be dooming a person to exist when non-existence is better

I agree with this sentiment.

>If you claim existence<non-existence therefore don't breed, then you accept the validity of existence>non-existence therefore breed.

But you lost me here... That sounds like illogical word salad to me, kek.

>>15850608
You are a little bit obsessed with suicide Anon, which worries me.

>>15850576
you wish fag

>the pleasures and experiences of life are worth living and outweigh the pain
>it is better to be able to choose between continued living and death rather than to never have a choice at all
>therefore natalism is moral
I won’t even adhere to the argument unironically, just showing how subjective and arbitrary antinatalist arguments are

>>15850621
If you don't exist, then you can't choose to exist or not. If you exist, you can choose to exist or not. Allowing choice is a good thing. Judging by antinatalists ITT, they overwhelmingly choose to continue to exist.

>>15850608
that's very life affirming of you

>>15850628
>comes with doomposting
>complains about doomposting
Anyway, if you just don't want to have children, then don't have them. You won't have them anyway, so... congrats?

Pascal’s wager, but for natalism.

>>15850645
Your second point is wrong, as death is ultimately not a choice. If you were born then you will die no matter what you do.

>>15850654
Why should I affirm your life? If you want to read life-affirming stuff, post in other threads or in other places.

>>15850671
choosing to continue to live is a choice though

>>15850621
If you hold that non-existence is better than existence, it is thus immoral to breed. Why? Because you are condemning a child to exist, and didn't ask them about it first. Alternatively, it's bad because you're forcing them to live in pain and denying them pleasure. Either way, you're forcing something bad on them.

If, however, existence is better than non-existence, then it is in fact immoral to NOT breed when you could have. Why? Because you are condemning a child to continue to not-exist, instead of the superior existence either, again, because you are denying them the choice, or because you're forcing pain upon them and denying them pleasure (either way you're forcing something bad on them).

If you accept one, you accept the other, the question is just whether existence or non-existence is better.

>>15850678
You can will to continue to live, but you can't necessarily make it happen.

>>15850686
You can for some time.

>>15850686
I never implied that you could make yourself immortal. But there is a presence of choice in life, some time between the ages of about 12 and the time you die, and this choice does not exist if you don’t exist to make the choice.

>>15850676
stop contradicting your worldview fag. By telling people to kill themselves you're actually solidifying the worldview of antinatalists

>>15850695
You can die in any number of ways that are beyond your control, or have your existence reduced to something excruciating and humiliating to the point that death would be preferable.

>>15850646
>If you don't exist, then you can't choose to exist or not.

That has to be wrong because it begs the question of how the very first being came into existence. He must have willed himself into existing, out of a previous state of non-existance.

>Judging by antinatalists ITT, they overwhelmingly choose to continue to exist.

Alright, yes. I'm one of the Anti-natalists who has been arguing the most in this thread so far and I see no reason to dispute this claim. I can conjur up another parable because it is often useful; If I am stuck on a remote tropical island with quite a few other people, I might present them with the notion that remaining on the island is disagreeable and we would be better off on another continent, yet I would remain on the island and my claim could still hold true.

>>15850663
I failed to deduce meaning from this post.

>>15850685
I think i do agree with you. And then i would say clearly that non-existence is preferable.

>>15850712
>That has to be wrong because it begs the question of how the very first being came into existence. He must have willed himself into existing, out of a previous state of non-existance.
avoids the point, and is wrong. You can’t will yourself into existence if you don’t exist. The first life form did not choose to come into existence. But we’re talking about billions of humans who depend on humans to come into existence. Humans aren’t amino acids.

>>15850697
"Choosing to live" isn't a choice in the same way that suicide is. Living entails acting in accord with your normative biological programming, and is natural human behavior. Suicide requires acting completely contrary to all of this and requires an immense exertion of will that some people simply cannot manage.

>>15850712
Clearly, the fact that you take effort to continue to exist demonstrates that you do not, in fact, believe non-existence is preferable.

>>15850712
>If I am stuck on a remote tropical island with quite a few other people, I might present them with the notion that remaining on the island is disagreeable and we would be better off on another continent, yet I would remain on the island and my claim could still hold true.
But you can't easily move to the continent without ship, even if continent is better. Meanwhile stopping existing is trivial, so if you don't do it, it's your choice.

>>15850732
suicide logically has to be a part of biological programming

>>15850742
It's humanly possible of course, but it isn't something that you are normally wired to perform.

>>15850733
See >>15850490
he thinks it’s preferable, but it’s so slightly preferable that it’s not worth a few seconds of pain. So it’s basically irrelevant. I think some people would even be willing to go through the act of committing suicide to have sex with porn star. So their non-existence fantasy isn’t even as good as temporary sex. Haha

>>15850733
Wow I haven't read this exact "argument" at least 50 times in every antinatalism thread.

>>15850700
If I think that existing is better than not, it does not mean that I will cry much about some annoying people following their philosophy. Although they will clearly not do it, so absolutely nothing will happen anyway.

>>15850730
>You can’t will yourself into existence if you don’t exist. The first life form did not choose to come into existence.

I think I would simply have to disagree entirely with what you just said.

>>15850733
>>15850734
With regards to my parable; I might choose to remain on the island in order to convince other people of the boons of transferring over to the continent.

>>15850770
>I think I would simply have to disagree entirely with what you just said.
cool argument. I guess you think amino acids were conscious prior to their existence

It’s so easy to btfo antinatalists. It could be more challenging but still it’s a lot of fun!

>>15850769
>If I think that existing is better than not
if you aren't an antinatal then you agree with this view. so stop telling other people to kill themselves.

>>15850770
If we'll replace the island with existence and continent with nonexistence, it actually follows that you stay alive just to convince others to die.

>>15850788
>It's so easy to call antinatalists hypocrites and pretend that this refutes their philosophy
Indeed

>>15850764
>okay smart guy, what's 2+2?
>and don't just say "4", give me a real answer

>>15850762
>>15850770
If existence is preferable AT ALL than you categorically reject anti-natalism. The fact that existence is only slightly better than non-existence means that there's a possibility for existence to be MUCH better than non-existence. In that case, you're denying a child that existence, and condemning them to non-existence.

So yes, if the pleasure of being a smug retard on the internet outweighs the pleasure of non-existence, you are refuting anti-natalism by simply being an anti-natalist. At which point, we come back to >>15849963.

>>15850800
>>and don't just say "4", give me a real answer
You've been given the answer to this issue presumably dozens of times and yet you continue to bring it up over and over. It's clear that anyone who uses the "why don't you kill yourself" objection isn't arguing in good faith and has no interest in understanding what antinatalists are actually saying.

>>15850799
not him. I understand you prefer life in the moment.

>>15850796
>here is my theory that shows that killing yourself is good
>your theory shows that killing yourself is good
>stop telling other people to kill themselves!

>>15850778
>I guess you think amino acids were conscious prior to their existence

I'd say it's highly likely... Even though it sounds weird, if we are discussing the true nature of consciousness then Yes I think that amino-acids might be conscious.

>>15850800
I see what you're trying to do, worming your way back to the assertion that anti-natalist ought to destroy their own mortal bodies. I've said no at least 5 times. Getting freaky at this point.

>>15850806
Cool, let me know when you want to have a philosophical discussion.

>>15850154
>For example if you think vanilla ice cream is better than chocolate ice cream that does not mean you want to annihilate all the chocolate ice cream in the universe.
Yeah but if you were eating chocolate ice cream and you had to opportunity to eat vanilla ice cream instead surely you’d take it?

>>15850808
>>here is my theory that shows that killing yourself is good
wrong, the only problem antinatalism deals with is the procreation

>>15849615
I have a problem with anti-natalism because on one hand I think it can be true, but on the other hand I think some people arrive to the wrong way. There are a lot of people who enjoy living, and if you enjoy living and can still see the truth of anti-natalism then I believe your opinion is more valid than the depressed incel anti-natalist, but perhaps it doesn’t matter..

>>15850824
No, I might just decide to share it with someone else.

>>15850808
Killing yourself isn't necessarily good. Being born entails various personal and emotional fetters from which it can be difficult to extricate yourself. The issue is procreation, which puts people into this position to begin with.

>>15850827
Well, to not procreate you should just do nothing, so it's the easiest theory to follow.

>>15850833
>no I just might eat it because someone else wants me to
be more precise

>>15850805
>REEEEEEEE WHAT THE FUCK IS 2+2 ANSWER ME STOP SAYING 4

>>15850837
If you are not born, you don't exist, and if you die, you don't exist, so it's pretty symmetrical. Unless your theory includes different pre-worlds/afterworlds, but then you should describe it.

>>15850852
You're only proving my point.

>>15850837
See
>>15850490
>>15850762

>>15850839
it's not an easy philosophy to follow at all

>>15850071
>It's a stupid
In what way?
>It's immoral
In what way?
>It's pointless
In what way?
>It's a messy activity.
Clean your room, then.

>>15850862
Yes, all the girls who grab me and try to procreate with me are sure a trouble hard to avoid.

>>15850869
You're asking me why it's immoral to murder?

>>15850849
It might be useful to remain alive, here, in this state of what we normally and generally call "existence" in order to help save souls, to serve the Lord, to do what is considered moral and just and good. Sounds simple enough... Is it really so hard a concept to grasp?

>>15850490
>I would go through 1,000 suicides
impossible situation. compare the example of suicide with something relatable at least.

everyone fear death, it's just. easy for you to just say it.
someone who wants to look into suicide has to look into the horror of death and murdering themselves. death is the most horrific prospect of being alive in the first place. and most of the people lack the balls to end it.

>the AN believes non-existence is better
>but he doesn’t want to commit suicide
>he will die anyway
>he believes life is inherently more painful than pleasurable
>therefore it is better to die earlier, though not through his one hand
>the AN implicitly consents to being murdered in his sleep
Where do you retards live?

>>15850888
>You're asking me why it's immoral to murder?
By the way, why? I have a clear answer: because murder turns someone who exists into someone who does not exist, and existing is vastly better. But what is your logic?
>to serve the Lord
If you are Christian, then just ask your priest whether antinatalism is good.

>>15850858
>>15850861
You didn't understand what I said. As an example, if one is born and has compassion for his family members, he may feel compelled to continue to live (at least temporarily) in order to avoid causing them pain. If he were not born he would not have to endure life in this manner.

>>15850911
Well, if you are not born, then your parents may be lonely without you. So them wanting you can justify birthing you.

>>15850897
>impossible situation.
no it’s pretty imaginable. I kill myself then the aliens bring me back to life. It’s only a hypothetical to show that I would go through that pain in order to achieve x. If non-existence is so much better, then the pain is a small price. Indeed, it’s not much worse than the pains we experience throughout life.

>>15850910
Murder is wrong because it violates the principle of Peace. And I like to often point out that suicide is wrong for the exact same reason. Because suicide is a murder, the fact that you are murdering yourself does not really matter. A person isn't allowed to kill another person... Even if that person is himself. That should be easy to understand.

>>15850928
Indeed, procreating is often an egotistical act. You are arguing, essentially, that it is justifiable to put another human under an entire lifetime's worth of suffering in order to prevent loneliness which could be eased through other means. This is what natalists believe.

>>15850928
haha! they are so retarded

>>15850910
I will also now point to the fact that Christians are not the only religious association in the world who collectively worship the Lord. In fact most religions on earth have a cult dedicated to the worship of the Lord.

>>15850934
>principle of Peace.
HAHAHAHAHA
>>15850935
>This is what natalists believe
because it makes sense. Most people desire to have children, to see their offspring and raise them well. Mothers love their children very much. You’re denying them that right

>>15850935
Then why do you care about well-being of such an evildoers? Truly the noble and selfless person!

>>15850929
>no it’s pretty imaginable. I kill myself then the aliens bring me back to life.
ok schizo

the psychological terror of going through the process of death is very high.

>>15850949
Then ask the priest of your religion. But in general religions don't support antinatalism because they die out otherwise.

>>15850953
>HAHAHAHAHA
Peace is the absence of war, the absence of conflict between peoples. That's why murder violates Peace. Might sound banal but I think it deserves explaining.

>>15850873
you're exaggerating but it's kinda true because i broke up with two girls in the past because they wanted kids

>>15850911
but this compassion is ultimately selfish and obviously outweighs your value of non-existence.

>>15850967
That's because the outcome is bad.

>>15850971
>But in general religions don't support antinatalism because they die out otherwise.

History seems to suggest otherwise... If anti-natalism tended to eradicate itself, then how come there are more of us around than ever before?

>>15850953
>because it makes sense. Most people desire to have children, to see their offspring and raise them well.
Irrelevant. Desiring something does not make it good or justifiable.
>Mothers love their children very much. You’re denying them that right
Why should I be concerned with this when they are not concerned with the suffering they cause through procreating?
>>15850964
I believe it is a normal consequence of being born. Some people can shed it, some can't. Some people can kill themselves, some can't. You aren't trying to look at the issue with compassion or understanding, but to find some "gotcha" platitude.

>>15850967
>the psychological terror of going through the process of death is very high.
yeah because you know it leads to non-existence, which you supposedly value. If I knew that the pain of suicide led to a million dollars, I would pay that price. It’s only temporary, anyway. Literally just do it.

>>15850982
There are many billions of people on earth, even the weirdest theories can find some followers.

>>15850984
>Desiring something does not make it good or justifiable.
it’s the only thing that makes it justifiable. A preferred experience is the moral experience. Tell me again why antinatalism is good without contradicting yourself on this point. Haha!

>>15850980
no because it's our programming

>>15850987
that's very life affirming of you to tell other people to kill themselves

>>15850987
It's psychologically difficult because were are biologically wired to preserve our life.

>>15850993
That's really true Anon. At least I believe it is. I am considering the original meaning of the English word "weird" in this context.

>>15850998
>that's very life affirming of you to tell other people to kill themselves
it’s the opposite, I’m trying to show you that antinatalism is retarded.

>>15850995
Antinatalism isn't good. I don't believe anything is good or bad.

>>15850987
>If I knew that the pain of suicide led to a million dollars, I would pay that price.

Haha that's kind of funny Anon, seeing as how you would obviously not be able to enjoy spending those million dollars after you had departed from this earthly existence...

>>15851018
Haha!

>>15849615
After I got sick. I wasn't even a moody teen. My favorite band is 311. I was nauseatingly positive until I was struck down, and even then, I've persisted.

I cannot think of a good reason to create an 80yr crisis to be solved. All of my up times aren't worth one day of my down times.

>>15851025
>what is a hypothetical
keep dancing. It’s so funny!

>>15851026
Did you think I was making an objective moral claim instead of just talking about my personal feelings?

>>15851012
by telling i should kill myself?
well then you're only proving me right

>>15851032
Care to elaborate on what you mean? It seems obviously contradictory. Perhaps you were making an allegorical statement?

>>15851038
then why enter into a discussion? I’m fine with your not having children so long as you allow me to choose to have children. This is how most natalists think

>>15851048
I have no say over whether others can have children.

>>15851043
the raised idea is this: the pain of suicide is too great a price to enter non-existence. But I say that the pain is very little, and would be worth pursuing if only for sex, or money, or any sort of significant improvement in life. Obviously I don’t mean you would actually die. You may say,”but you won’t fear the suicide if you know you won’t actually die.” That’s correct, and you shouldn’t fear suicide if you truly believe nonexistence is better. You DO believe it’s better, but it’s so insignificantly better that you won’t kill yourself to get there. It’s not as if you must crush your balls to kill yourself.

>>15851041
Claim that from A follows B is not equal to the claim that B is true.

>>15849615
I honestly consider myself an anti-anti-natalist at the point. Not breeding is sinful if you have higher than average intelligence and no genetic defects.

>>15851071
Fundamentally I don't see the reason for suicide. Because you are eventually going to die from old age anyway. This happens automatically. So I am saying; Why spend energy on killing yourself? You will die automatically anyway.

>>15851074
what is A? and what is B?

>>15851080
Interesting standpoint. Why do you believe so? Can't you see an objective downside to flooding this earth with too many human specimens?

>>15851088
A is claim that nonexistence is preferable to existence.
B is claim that suicide is good.

>>15851087
See >>15850906

>>15851095
It is bad if it will lead to overpopulation which will, in turn, lead to depopulation or massive life quality drop. But if you can increase the population of earth without such negatives, then it's clearly virtuous.

>>15851102
who said suicide is good?

>>15851104
>he believes life is inherently more painful than pleasurable

That's the point on which i disagree. I don't think that "life is inherently more painful than pleasurable". But still i do believe that non-existance is a preferable state as opposed to existance. That is the scope in which I approve of Anti-natalism.

>>15851113
Are you arguing that more (higher number) humans being alive, is virtuous?

>>15851113
you forgot that we may eventually create lifetimes that are infinitely good, given our technological progress and interest in self-flourishing

>>15851121
>That's the point on which i disagree. I don't think that "life is inherently more painful than pleasurable". But still i do believe that non-existance is a preferable state as opposed to existance. That is the scope in which I approve of Anti-natalism.
then how is non-existence better? Non-existence is neutral, yes? It’s neither pleasurable nor painful.

>>15851120
It logically follows from nonexistence being better than existence.

>>15851121
>Are you arguing that more (higher number) humans being alive, is virtuous?
Yes, if the resulting humans have reasonable life quality and this does not lead to some future bad outcomes, then it's clearly virtuous.

>>15850814
>I'd say it's highly likely... Even though it sounds weird, if we are discussing the true nature of consciousness then Yes I think that amino-acids might be conscious.
Unfathomably (unironically) based.

>>15851135
I've said it before in an earlier post in this thread but I can express the general idea again. "Existing", in the way that we generally have come to known the word, is a state of being. It can be compared to a place or a situation. The Being (this is you and me) can occupy many different states. "Existance" is one of them. Now what I am saying, and what Anti-natalists such as myself are saying, is that the different states of being exist in a hierarchy. That means that some states are better and some are worse. Now we are asserting that this state of "Existing" is bad. It's very low on the hierarchy. So then, there are better states and to reach them, the being needs to Die.

We do generally not condone the act of suicide because this is to most human individuals a very traumatizing occurance but what we do is remain true to Principles. We are concerned with speaking the truth and always sharing it with our fellow travellers.

>>15851152
You're only taking the quantitative aspect of human life into account which is bothersome to say the least. Consider the qualitative aspect as well.

>>15849642
This is the only correct comment I've seen

>>15851137
it doesn't imply that suicide is good

>>15851173
Yes, I mentioned the reasonable life quality in the post. Having smaller, but very happy population may be preferable to larger but very unhappy. But if life quality is comparable, then more is better.

>>15851183
Suicide moves you from existence to nonexistence. If existence is good and nonexistence is bad, then of course it is bad, but that's not true in the opposite case.

>>15851191
>Having smaller, but very happy population may be preferable to larger but very unhappy. But if life quality is comparable, then more is better.

I'm not going to dispute what you just said. I just wanted to point out that it is truely a topic worth contemplating.

>>15851202
you're a brave man if you think committing suicide is easy

>>15851231
It's not easy, but exactly because nonexistence is undesirable. If suicide guaranteedly led to the better existence, it would be no scarier than parachute jump.

>>15851212
Yes, that's an interesting topic, studied in utilitarianism philosophy and many practical questions.

>>15851240
>It's not easy, but exactly because nonexistence is undesirable.
no it's the billion years of programming

>>15851266
so what? Don’t you realize you’re justifying reproduction as well? If you can’t follow your philosophy then why should I?

Anyone else think suicide worship is silly?
it's so reddit honestly

>>15851284
I'd like to point out that the Romans saw suicide as a worthy thing indeed, and even made a ritual of the act of suicide. Many Romans of noble family were regarded as highly esteemed due to having commited suicide. Of course not hap-hazardly, but in certain formal context as prescribed by their culture.

>>15851284
when you’re too weak to control your life you cope by controlling your death

>>15851266
Everything is "programming", so using this word does not add any sense.

>>15851281
psychological torture of going through the process of death isn't as nearly bad as denying procreation. we procreate to be immortal, to leave someone to carry our name after our death. you can replace the fetish of immortality with art if you want.

>>15851302
It was essentially capital punishment, but in a more dignified form and without harming the family. That's true for seppuku too.

>>15851311
you need the mountains of courage to kick the bucket

If ever the label of mental illness be appropriate, it should apply to antinatalists. Their brains are non functioning, they have failed their biological imperative on account of a mind virus, a meme. They ought to be culled in all cases, to protect the human organism from this lethal mind virus.

>>15851324
Yes. There is also a fascinating ritual which Evola mentions in one book. It is the Roman "Devotio". It is a form of human sacrifice where a military leader sacrifices himself by throwing himself at the enemy. Many Roman generals used Devotio. I think you can consider it as a form of suicide but with a higher goal in mind (victory). Another thing that comes to mind is the japanese Kamikaze.

>>15851334

Famous male philosophers and their procreation status

Plato - never married, no kids
Shankaracharya - no kids
Avicenna - no kids
Aquinas - no kids
Spinoza - no kids
Kant - no kids
Kierkegaard - no kids
Schopenhauer - no kids
Nietzsche - no kids
Heidegger - no kids, raised wife's son
Wittgenstein - gay nigga
Sarte - no children

So you are claiming that all of these philosophers who never procreated had mind virus?

>>15851353
If you are a genius in some area, then working in this area may be way more useful for you and humanity than having children (or it may be harmful for everyone in certain cases)

>>15851353
Not necessarily. Not every individual has to procreate to contribute genetically to humanity, because they share genes with others whose reproductive success they may benefit. Antinatalism is, on the other hand, maladaptive by definition, it’s a mental illness.

With that said, Sartre, Schopenhauer, Heidegger, Kant, Wittgenstein were all defective humans, without a doubt.

>>15851413
Nietzsche was also mentally ill. I’m sure the others you lost were likely as wel but I don’t know enough about everybody on your list to be certain.

>>15851383
>>15851413
>NOOOOOOOOOOO YOU MUST SUBMIT TO THE SOCIETY YOU MUST BE A SLAVE JUST US

>>15851448
the same type of groupthink is used to justify a universal suicide of the human race. Perhaps it’s better to say that these men were better off not having children, unlike most people

>>15851448
You can kill yourself, that can be your contribution. By removing your maladaptive psychology from the memeosphere, you too can contribute to humanity.

>>15851448
you cant be a edgy rebellious teenager for your whole life anon, you have to grow up eventually

>>15851464
im just done with this "debate"
i would like to quote Ernest Becker

>“The road to creativity passes so close to the madhouse and often detours or ends there.”
so yeah the "normal" people rarely create anything worthwhile

>>15851490
nah my faggot i love to make natalists seeth

>>15851522
I guess we’ll have to settle for using you as an example.

>>15851538
>as an example.
for what?

>>15851549
An example of maladaptive thinking

>>15851559
i don't anon know, after this discussion in this thread im gonna rethink my views.
but not having children can never be a part of collective grand narrative of humanity. it's your very personal choice.

>>15851593
>but not having children can never be a part of collective grand narrative of humanity

Hard disagree, Anon. It definitely can.

Anti natalism is only correct when applied to Africa and South America
change my mind

>>15851611
>Hard disagree, Anon. It definitely can.
it really doesn't matter after the invention of artificial wombs

>>15851646
Quite amusing that you would say that. It wouldn't change much at all, in fact. Life would go on as useful, and people would be born and die.

>>15850045
>blind
Living in the cave and unable to see the light.

>>15851622
in 50 years words father and mother will be a curse, insult. just live. life will change your mind, not pixels on screen.

>>15851661
i don't think of life as useful but you're life will go. and even David Benatar who wrote this book shares this opinion, he said somewhere in an interview that he wrote this book for academics purpose he don't believe that this philosophy will ever become famous. that's why it's merely a personal choice

35, after 3 kids. actually I learnt it after the first, but other things are were more important at the time.

>>15851776
anon why? please elaborate
most people here wish to get married and have kids

>>15851740
if it takes 50 years to convince people of anti natalism then they would have already have kids and you would be at a loss

>>15849806
Why seek to end Samsara? Should we not simply accept it as a necessary aspect of existence, being beyond good and evil?

>>15851860
>Why seek to end Samsara?
because eastern religions accept that life is suffering

>>15851891
and why is that bad

>>15851860
If you want an actual answer, it's not that life is suffering it's that suffering is. The Noble Truth "idam dukkham" means "this is dukkha", more accurately "dukkha is". Dukkha is all bad things arising from impermanence, to being sad on a Sunday because tomorrow is Monday to breaking your leg.

Why leave Samsara? Because doing so is better in every sense. You don't have to if you don't want to, there's no punishment inflicted by others (you could argue that staying in samsara is a self inflicted punishment, however). For the laity, yeah just accepting with it and seeking to minimize the deleterious effects (you can do this; you can't stop all of them, however) is perfectly fine.

>>15852015
if you see it for yourself then pick up a mallet and smash your dick

>>15849615
Like 15, I grew out of it around 19.

>>15850049
not an anti natalist but that is a retarded argument. they didn’t ask to be born but even if they suffer in life why would they want to cause more suffering to their loved ones given they will die anyways naturally. people only suicide if living is so unbearable because their suffering is so intense that they need to end it immediately, most anti natalists don’t feel like their suffering is that bad that they need to kill themselves, they just wouldn’t want to wish their existence on another life

>>15851814
what loss? greatest depression is coming. drug abuse and children killing parents will be very common. civilization and economy expanded, but now it hit the wall. end of innovation. end of motivation. look how toxic become everything, science, movie industry, society.

>>15849615
>Better to have never been
>The harm of coming into existence
Hasn't the author created more harm by bringing his book into existence?

i stubbed my toe and it rEAlly fUckinG hURTS !!!

Anti-natalism is the endgame of hedonic utilitarian ethics, the only ethics that matters, and ethics being the only field of philosophy that matters.

>>15849688
this is not a commandment this is a meditation. the commandment to have children can be found in the Old Testament "be fruitful and multiply" and encouraged in the New “whoever welcomes one of these little children in my name welcomes me; and whoever welcomes me does not welcome me but the one who sent me.” if you're not having children for the sake of joining a monastery or becoming a priest, you'll have many spiritual children that you will see the fruits of in heaven.

Natalists tend to underrate the pain of the world and don't acknowledge that much of their pleasure comes directly from causing pain to others and if this were not so then their lives would be less pleasurable and more painful, possibly changing the equation. The position that "the pleasure is worth the pain" is only possible via exploitation and outsourcing most of your pain to other being who will feel it just as severely as you otherwise would have.

Imagine building an academic career on a handful of Cioran parmacological aphorisms to then be championed by depressed adolescents. Pathetic.

>>15849615
How can life possibly be judged as worthless through its own lens?

>>15851353
>Philosophers are maladjusted introverts
breaking news

>>15857134
>Cioran
No it kinda started with this >>15850045 autist one thousand years ago

>>15857183
Still not interesting.

>>15857118
What are some examples of this outsourcing?

I agree in the sense that consuming meat (and even dairy) in a highly industrialised society means inflicting harm on animals in order to efficiently produce enough meat etc. And also in terms of producing the metals necessary to produce iPhones often leads to misery in Africa etc (I forgot the name of that one metal which various warlords fight over in Congo IIRC). What else are you thinking of?

>>15857214
Epicurus told his followers to don't have kids. Ecclesiastes' author goes full antinatalist mode one time. Buddhist and Christian monks aren't allowed to have kids.

>>15857265
Sources?

>>15849688
>>15849688
Sr Augustine was the first jew to weaponize Christianity

>>15857302
Ecclesiastes 4:1
>Again I looked and saw all the oppression that was taking place under the sun: I saw the tears of the oppressed-- and they have no comforter; power was on the side of their oppressors-- and they have no comforter.

Ecclesiastes 4:2
>And I declared that the dead, who had already died, are happier than the living, who are still alive.

Ecclesiastes 4:3
>But better than both is the one who has never been born, who has not seen the evil that is done under the sun.

I have read somewhere about Epicurus so I can't give you the source exactly. But he said somewhere that a wise man do not marry and have kids or something like that.
Google Christian, Buddhist and Jain monks and issue of procreation. They're not allowed to procreate.

crap, I missed a chance to post my forced pasta in an anti-natalist thread

>>15857228
prisons, hospitals, local war conflicts. when you walk on a street or watch TV you see only survivors, only censored version of reality, so you children don't get trauma.

>>15850039
In Asia you will find the highest rate of births-per-capita, and the greatest disparity in living conditions. Why haven't all of these people who are horribly suffering on a systematic level for their whole lives still alive and perpetuating the cycle of life?
Ehhh best not to think about it, the only people who could be anti-natalist are people who haven't suffered, unlike me, an enlightened thinker and tormented soul. :^)

>>15857737
larping. having children is status. more people, more dense conditions, more actual hate toward each other. nobody loves you - make your own lover. and they are afraid to question tradition, status quo. and their dark soul don't imagine other purpose in life but to feed off childrens spiritual energy.

>>15849615
That book sucks.
The thesis hings on the idea
>Your life is WAAAAAAAAY worse that you are willing to admit
Eh, life ain't so bad.

>>15850060
I'm an anti natalist and the answer is simple as fuck:because its scary as hell
I'm afraid of nothingness,but If I had never been anything in the first place,this fear nor any other would have ever existed
I'm stuck in here now,and I'm terrified of what would release me.Because of this impossible to control terror,I will always find excuses to not kill my self,but the true answer is simply that im very afraid of death.I do not want to die,It's just that I would have preferred to never have been alive.

>>15861426
all that fear would go away in just a few seconds

>>15850414
Not everyone would agree that is good
Sharks have substantially more environmental value than a human does
Humans have negative value to an ecosystem
By killing that shark to save that person you’ve substantially detrimentally impacted the environment

>>15861468
That's a very rational and logical thing to say.You're correct.
Yet,this fear does not care about what makes sense or not.

>>15857375
All of these are poeticisms, they aren't injunctions. Someone merely saying something in the Bible doesn't make it a law we have to apply, or an irrefutable point. Furthermore, all of the quotes from the Bible "supporting" anti-natalism in this thread are based on bogus interpretations. Christian monks taking vows of chastity from marriage is due to them being "married" to Christ (in a figurative sense), and their abstinence from sex is to prevent the temptation it may cause (monks also don't eat meat, except for fish on some occasions; much like sex, meat can become an addiction, but this doesn't mean you can't do it if you can do it in moderation). Besides, monks are not like other Christians, and not all Christians are supposed to become monks, only a few.

>>15857531
Anti-natalists are in good company, then, for they haven't grown out of the "childish" state in which everything is traumatic. "Trauma" is in the mind; when you grow up, you realize not everything's fair, not everything's peachy, and that's not a bad thing.

>>15861426
You could continue thinking this way, or change the way you think. What's the use of all your perceived intellect and superiority if you can't even use it to escape fear? Perhaps it wasn't their in the first place.

>>15862076
The way I think has nothing to do with the choice,it's all in the gut feeling and the emotion.
I do not perceive myself as intelligent and superior,by the way.I'm retarded enough to be slave to my emotions and my self preservation instinct.

>>15862098
If you are a slave to your instincts, why aren't you perpetuating your species? Who will punish you for reproducing, or anything? Or is that another one of those "emotions and instinct" things? Why is it that only you anti-natalist types are so impotent as to be bound to "emotions and instinct" when there are countless examples of people overcoming these same things? You lack willpower and discipline

>>15862143
I said that I was a slave to my self preservation instinct,not to my instincts overall.
Also people have different capabilities ,for example,you rationalize everything as if it were an attempt to compensate for you inability to perceive and understand emotion
You clearly are way more capable than me when it comes to rational thinking,but you don't seem to understand emotion at all.You're just as weak as me,but in a different way

you existed for an infinity as nothing, and after this you will exist for an infinity as nothing. you’ve only got 70 years or so here, not much at all comparatively, so i don’t see why you can’t just stick it out. it might be shitty sometimes, but it’ll be more interesting than doing nothing

>>15849615
Congrats on lowering the average iq of western nations, just let the lower iq races breed us out of existence

>>15862187
Maybe we should let them take over you miserable cunt, at least they won’t be constantly moaning about iq all the time

>>15861937
yeah, that’s why I have sex without giving a fuck about antinatalism. What are you gonna do?