/lit/ - Literature

>>16334793
It has been refuted so many times. AN just ssem to choose to ignore the refurations.

>>16334793
Because it has no argument to refute

>>16334793
Anti-natalists are ugly.

>>16334800
How has it been refuted? What's the leading argument?

>>16334793
Both greatest cope and greatest excuse “man” has created. Do it faggot. Literally no one will ever care.

>>16334804
Yes, it does. I'd ask you to not play stupid but since 99% of breeders are literally so self-absorbed they might as well live inside their own anus, I think it's an useless request.

>>16334793
What's the argument for anti-natalism? Never caught on why perfectly normal people could not fulfill their purpose

>>16334806
Life is ugly. If you are unable to see that you're either a sociopath with zero ability to experience empathy, or you're retarded. Either way, you shouldn't have any children.

>>16334793
Is this in support of adoption because that’s what I plan to do.

>>16334818
Do what, nigglet? What you on about?

Oh boy is everyone ready for another thread in which breeders claim like they are doing something special when they're doing literally what every single life form has been programmed to do since the dawn of time, and literally every idiot on earth who had a kid has done since the beginning of history?

The fact that anti-natalism is the ultimate trigger to people on this board is a testament to it's validity and to the amount of normies here.

>>16334821
First, because it's not consensual. Giving birth is not different from raping someone. No one chooses.

Suffering is the only certainty of life. To create a living, conscious being in a world where pain and death are all we are sure to get it's to gamble with Fate.

>>16334831
Why is anti-natalism? What leads you to this conclusion? what is the rough percentage of people in the philosophy that want to stop breeding in its majority or entirety?

>>16334828
Yes. Antinatalism in general advocates for reducing the suffering of those who are already born the most you can. Since kids up for adoption are usually in a bad position adopting them could reduce their suffering.

>>16334831
Life is great, you're just defective and we'd fix you if you let us.

>>16334828
Yes, definitely. If you wish to have a family, raise children and all that crap, the only moral choice is to adopt. Not only you're not commiting the mistake of adding to the endless cycle of suffering, but you're actively reducing the suffering of a being that does not exist because of you.

>>16334824
Life is pretty and children bring happiness to a family and purpose to the parents.

>>16334811
Suffering is not quantifiable. The existence of suffering does not preclude the existence of happiness. Most people enjoy living.

>>16334793
retarded self-righteous version of utilitarianism for smug liberals

>>16334842
We don't choose the soul.

>>16334856
/thread

>>16334831
It's so strange. You can actually argue about anything anywhere nowadays: racism, police violence, progressiveness, economy, nazism, furry sex... But to say you're against the act of having children makes everyone go crazy, from both left abd right wings. Isn't it obvious? To give birth is to condemn a conscious being to a whole life, and for what? To give their lives meaning? To hold marriages together? To create another wageslave that will be forced to suffer, see people they love die and work 9 hours a day only so that he won't starve?

>>16334843
Quantity is meaningless here. To give birth is immoral simply by virtue of being a sentence for death and suffering. It is immoral, it should be a fucking crime.

>>16334869
>>16334864

>>16334856
>Suffering is not quantifiable
What, so it... doesn't exist? Where are you going with this line of thought? Seems like hand waving.

It's an academic question. None of you losers will ever reproduce. And that's a good thing.

>>16334851
>>16334843
Have you ever done anything in your life to avoid suffering? Taken some medicine to cure an illness? Fixed something broken? If yes, you seem to agree that pain (even when it teaches you something) is something we actively seem to try and cure/avoid/fix in most cases.

But there is pain in this world that cannot be cured. Because suffering is so certain we create entire cultures around "manning up and swallowing the pain". In this very thread you will see people saying anti-natalists should just kill themselves, and then say in the same sentence that they will go to hell and suffer forever when they do commit suicide, and etc.

But suffering is not unavoidable. Suffering can be avoided if you aren't born. That's basically it. If somehow we could ask people if they want to be born before they are, life would be very different. Imagine people living in utter abject shit in some war zone or whatever. You wouldn't trade your life with them, but they were born there by chance and have to live this life because of ... why? Why did people need to have children?

I have seen dozens of these threads, and no one has ever been able to come up with a good, non selfish argument for why you must have kids. The answer people should give, I feel is, "yes, not being born is the only way to reduce suffering to a minimal degree, but I want to have kids for selfish reasons, and that's my choice". At least it'd be honest.

>>16334851
How? Did you notice that there are about 50 posts on here already an NOT A SINGLE PERSON brought a real argument to refute antinatalism? "Life is great", are you 100% sure your children will experience and have the same opinion on life? If the answer is no, there is no moral justification to still want to have a child.

>>16334853
Shut the fuck up, you piece of shit. People like you are the worst, literal jewslaves and Demiurge's ass lickers. Fucking sociopath, you make me sick.

>>16334856
The existence of suffering, by itself, is enough argument to be against new life. Also, as I said before, it's not consensual.

>>16334886
>Suffering can be avoided if you aren't born
Imagine being atheist then make moral claims of right and wrong.

>>16334890
Take your meds

>>16334864
Show me a soul, then.

I didn't choose to be born, but I can take the conscious choice of adopting a child instead of bringing another one to this shit bucket.

>>16334856
Antinatalists are just trolls looking to argue. There is no other motivation

>>16334884
Yes, and I'm glad I was born a cum guzzling faggot because of that. I will not add to the karma of cursing beings to exist against their will.

>>16334897
None of the major religions say anything negative about being born. I have actually looked deeply into this. This doesn't influence the argument.

>>16334793
>This thread

>>16334894
We are the cupid who having chosen this life, as revealed in the myth of er, are the flame that kindled our parents love.

>>16334905
It's the purest form of will power

Proof Antinatalism is evil and wrong.

Literally only white people even consider things like this.

The rest of humanity happily has children. They like living.

Literally only white people can save and protect the planet from Jews.

Once you understand this and accept it the meaning and purpose it create will instantly cure your self-absorption induced depression.

Everyone wins accept Satan’s chosen people.

>>16334897
Your god is a jew sociopath. Enjoy the reptilian double cock in your hole, breeder trash.

>>16334886
This line of thought entirely discounts the idea that suffering can have positive effects. I think you're dodging the major hole in AN, which is that it presupposes this idea that suffering is bad and pleasure is good, which is a contestable point. Antinatalism is just a highly derivative topic, and people who believe in or against it are usually arguing an abstracted version of more basal beliefs. The whole thing is pretty tiresome.

Personally, I will never have children. I had a difficult upbringing that damaged me in a way my parents weren't able to protect me from. I have little to no confidence in my own ability to protect tiny mutations of half-me from similar stressors. It also lets me be a little more circumspect on the future of the world. I don't have any skin in the game, so as long as shit holds together for the duration of my life, I don't really care how badly everyone else fucks to whole thing up.

>>16334793
It's just extreme depression combined with projection and therefore shouldn't be taken seriously. There, I argued against it.

>>16334921
SEE
>>16334920

>>16334905
OP here. No man, it's not that. I'm just looking for a single argument to destroy antinatalism because I am myself looking for reasons to see my own existence as a gift to be enjoyed, instead of a sea of suffering. Yet as you can see for this thread, no one has it. Just personal attacks and speculation.

>>16334899
>I didn't choose to be born
You choose to be every day, every moment is a new little life you force upon your future self that you currently presume is yourself, without soul where your identity over time? Just as you choose every life you've lived, you force life upon your self every day by staying alive. You are not your future so why do you condemn your future to life?

>>16334905
I wish you were never born.

>>16334933
You're depressed, antinatalism only makes sense to depressed people

>>16334912
Of course, the baby being eaten alive by ants right now in Africa has chosen its life. Go fuck yourself

>>16334923
I'm really not trying to circumvent that, I agree that there is things we could call suffering which have positive effects, but I think one has to be seriously ill intended to claim all suffering can have positive effects. There is definitely destructive suffering which only ruins your life. The way you describe your life brings those things to mind.

We never know which type of suffering (manageable or not) is gonna hit us, or when. To me that's the point of anti-natalism.

>>16334921
>picture of Hermes the Conductor of Souls
>abrahamism

>>16334934
Free will is a spook.

>>16334842
Yes, I can see from where you are coming, the only certainty in life is suffering, yet we are not saving anything by not having children, the only thing you save is a concept in your head that will never exist (not saying that's bad), the creation of a baby proper dooms it to life, to experience its eternal pain, but also it's few and far in between pleasures, by denying the concepts into material reality, you are not only depriving it of negatives but also of positives, which by denying the concepts only (Or many depending on your mystic beliefs if you have them) chances at existing, you are negating its opportunity to ever feel positive. That's my take, don't expect to be taken seriously.

>>16334920
Wow, such convincing points. I love life now, thanks anon

>>16334940
You're depressed, antinatalism only makes sense to depressed people

>>16334938
Yes. Either by the evil life it lived in its past existences or in its foolish self-willed descent into becoming.

>>16334923
Sure, being an AIDS baby is such a great life lesson! Being retarded, developing Alzheimer's great, amirite? You just spilled a soup of cope.

>>16334958
why are you so retarded

>>16334793
Life is superior and gives more pleasure than death in most lives, therefore, it is immoral not to constantly give life

>>16334943
Ah so how am I supposed to stop myself from happily having children?

>>16334948
Someone who suffered something that reduces their quality of life to the point of thinking of anti-natalism is usually depressed, yes. Being depressed is the expected response to uncontrolled not-treatable suffering.

>>16334924
What you call depression I call basic empathy. Do not unto others what you wouldn't do unto yourself. Raping is forcing sex upon an unwilling conscious being without their consent and without a thought for the trauma and suffering it will cause, for your own pleasure. Giving birth is exactly the same thing.

>>16334964
"Death" is not the same as "not being born".
Death implies you were born and had to go through the pain of dying. Big difference.
Also I'm skeptical of your claim. Seems like the kind of cope people have to convince themselves of to go to work everyday or something.

>>16334793
This is no different from posting a sad wojack. Self pity is a disease.

A single kiss of teenage love is worth a thousand torments.
A single moment of happiness, if you could find it, transcends all suffering.

>>16334793
There are arguments to refute it but I'm an antinatalist.

>>16334945
t.Juden

>>16334976
And why is this wrong?

>>16334988
I should have remembered to ask my grandfather in his deathbed if his teenagehood kisses paid for the 10 years he spent ill and bitter towards the end of his life.

>>16334793
i don't need arguments, i just fuck and coom and make kids what are you gonna do nerd lmao cry and listen to evanescence?

>>16334976
No, you're depressed and can't think clearly, obvously. Go fix that first and you'll see you're spouting depressed nonsense.

>>16334937
I think it makes a lot of sense to any human being that KNOWS that you can never predict HOW another being will experience suffering in this world. No amount of education, love or material assets you provide your children can prevent them from feeling pain in a completely different way than you and anyone else.

Perhaps we, depressed people, are the only ones capable of true empathy. Self-proclaimed good people and good parents gave birth to killers, rapists, and terrible people. To have a child is to create either a perpetrator or a victim of suffering.

>>16334995
Anti-natalism, at the end of the day, is not about convincing others to not have kids. It's about you deciding not to have them. You just kind of imagine others might decide to do the right thing too.
I know no one is gonna come into this world to suffer because of me. That's about it. You do whatever you want.

>>16334976
Depression hijacks your emotional capacity, including empathy. You view the world through a lense of suffering which you won't if you're no longer depressed.

>>16334793
>has never met a lawyer

>>16334999
see >>16335003
>Depression hijacks your emotional capacity, including empathy. You view the world through a lense of suffering which you won't if you're no longer depressed.

>>16334981
Keep telling yourself that you immoral retard, but you’re just coping that you either can’t create life or is too immature
Not being born is still worse than being born, which makes it immoral not to create life

>>16334994
>any random kiss
=/=
>teenage LOVE
To behold the dawn on stillness justifies all the world.

>>16334842
>First, because it's not consensual. Giving birth is not different from raping someone. No one chooses.
Since whatever entity is born quite literally does not exist beforehand, this is meaningless. Appyling ideas of consent to entities that do not exist is completely nonsensical and a category mistake.
>Suffering is the only certainty of life. To create a living, conscious being in a world where pain and death are all we are sure to get it's to gamble with Fate.
On the whole, the vast majority find that all the good outweigh all the bad. If this was not the case, suicide would be the rule, not the exception. Further, suicide is always an option.
I am aware of Benatar's painfully bad analogy about going to a poor show and staying instead of leaving because you're already there. I don't find it convincing at all.

>>16334944
You are saving a conscious being from potential suffering, that's the point. If you want a family, just adopt some abandoned kid. There's no moral reason to consciously decide to have a baby. It's the most selfish thing a human could do to another.

>>16335012
He literally married his teenage sweetheart and they lived together for 60 years. You might think I'm trolling or coping, but neither of them were living a dignified life on their last 10~15 years. It was truly heart wrenching to see it. For some people that kind of low quality of life comes way sooner.

>>16334994
You're implying an argument for euthanasia, not antinatalism.

>>16335011
>Not being born is still worse than being born
Explain.

>>16335011
You admitted yourself that "most life blabla". If it's "most" that means some people, even in your own skewed eyes, are deeply unhappy. If you cannot control what outcome your child has (what if they're one of the unhappy ones?), it seems to me that you're the immoral one.

>>16334793
OP what have you done to alleviate your depression before going on this mental masturbation session?

>>16334954
Ok dude, I respect your religious point of view. But it's not only not an objective argument, but you're actually saying it's ok to do something to an unconsenting person because of your beliefs of what life is about at a metaphysical level. Would you think it's okay to a muslim dude stone your wife to death and cut your hands off because that's what their religion preach?

>>16334793
voluntarily becoming an evolutionary dead end tranny detected

>>16335003
>>16335008
"Depression" is the expected response when a certain threshold of uncontrolled suffering afflicts someone. This threshold is different for each person, or animal, but it's there. Some animals stop eating to death after a traumatic event. Humans have all kinds of social and cultural and biological systems to keep them going after traumatic events, but sometimes that begins to fail. Being depressed, sometimes, it's not "crazy" or unwarranted.

>>16335024
That's the risk of life. If you want a safe happy bubble, go hook yourself up to a morphine drip. Experiencing life includes both happiness and suffering and you don't have a right to either exclusively.

>>16334983
Lack of empathy and selfishness are the diseases. Pity your unborn children.

>>16335019
>thinking your grandparents would forsake those 60 years to avoid the last 10

>>16335036
That doesn't mean anything. Your depression makes you unable to see things as they are and instead makes you view life through a lense of suffering, unable to appreciate the good things. You can't make rational decisions/arguments in your current state.

>>16335030
>>16334993
>>16334897
>right and wrong
>objective

>>16335043
It sounds absurd to you because you weren't there seeing the things he was saying on those last few years, and especially the last few days. Suffering does things to your perception, that people seem to not believe unless it happens to them. The sad thing is understand the breeders here, and how to them it seems like just nonsensical whining. But it isn't.

How come when I rape bitches they cum extra hard? Why do they like getting raped? How can you even rape a woman if she is just going to have a massive orgasm all over my rape dick?

>>16334988
Here in the favelas of Brazil drug dealers take the kids from their defeated rivals, pluck out their eyes and hang them with their own intestines. Your puerile words are proof that natalists are simply unable or unwilling to go really deep unto the pits od despair that can exist in this world.

>>16335024
Not at all. If you walk outside you have a chance of being hit by a car, that doesn’t mean going outside is bad in total, or that driving is immoral because you have a chance of causing harm.
If this was the case almost all actions would be immoral, because almost all could result in someone being hurt

>>16335036
> Being depressed, sometimes, it's not "crazy" or unwarranted.
Not unwarranted, sure, but it is crazy in the sense that you can't think rationally and are in an impaired mental state. I was once where you are now, and once the depression was lifted I saw how bleak my outlook on life was due to my mental state.

>>16334998
I am truly, deeply sorry for you. Even more for your children.

>>16335049
>Suffering above a certain threshold that lowers your quality of life significantly makes you see life through a lens of suffering. You're not qualified to talk about it anymore.

>>16335066
Why? For being able to think straight?
>>16335067
Yes. You wouldn't expect a schizophrenic to rationally talk about conspiracies either.

>>16335003
That's what my therapist keeps saying to me, even though she couldn't give me a single argument against antinatalism besides a more professional variation of "life is good".

The point is that the very fact that a person is capable of suffering through a disease that harms it's emotional capacity is already enough reason to be against birthing new life.

>>16335067
You bring about your own suffering. Sometimes life throws curveballs and it can be hard to deal with. But how you deal with it determines the extent to which you will experience that suffering as such.

>>16335076
She's right and you can't see it because you're mentally impaired and cannot argue rationally because your emotional capacity has been hijacked. Your entire worldview is overlayed by a thick blanket of damp darkness and you have to take that off first.

>>16335001
Archons hate this guy.

>>16335054
>>16335057
>>16335066
>the more people don't have children and families the worse society becomes

>>16335076
>The point is that the very fact that a person is capable of suffering through a disease that harms it's emotional capacity is already enough reason to be against birthing new life.
No because once you've overcome it you'll be stronger than you were before it. Life is about facing challenges and growing, not sulking.

>>16335025
I've been getting therapy for a year (cognitive behavioral) and taking meds (fluoxetin for depression, alprazolam for anxiety). Sports, creative writing, painting, piano playing, dating apps, you name it... I'm trying everything, anon.

I'm much better than I used to be, but my existential dread has not subsided. And I don't think it ever will.

>>16335088
If you can't accept the fact that there are illnesses and other maladies, mental or not, that cannot be overcome, it's pointless to discuss this, because it leaves the realm of reason and evidence. It's literally just survivorship bias at that point. You survived everything in your life so far and you cherrypick other survivors and believe it's a general property of life.
Every depressed person who seems like a weakling to you has probably overcome many problems in their life leading up to the point where it was too much. The "survivors" you are choosing to focus on might also just be a few more problems away from breaking up for good.

I actually think this bias is a key point of people who believe having kids is "the right" thing to do. I think in most cases people just don't think about it and go through the motions because it's what they were taught. People who thing there is something especially righteous about having kids have a cognitive bias.

>>16335079
the thing is that there is no ''rational'' point to life. you can't rationally justify any value without some axioms, all of which spring from basically delusions and biological programming. if you were to look at life completely soberly without your attachments and passions clouding your judgment, you wouldn't say '' life is a good thing''.

i am not an antinitilist by the way

>>16335038
The problem is subjecting another conscious being to this experience without knowing the intensity of either good or bad they're sure to have. This concept seems so alien to you that I'm seriously considering you might be a sociopath.

>>16334869
Life is wonderful, I want more people to feel that.

>>16335022
Life is more happiness than suffering, not being born is therefore less total happiness, because it is no happiness.

>>16335115
Jesus christ OP please work on fixing your depression and stop this mental masturbation. It's not helping your situation, you're only digging your grave deeper. You seem to assume people deserve to be happy or have a right to health. No, you have to work hard for that shit, and that includes overcoming hardship, suffering and depression.

Say you're right. Now what? Are you happy now?

>>16335119
>>16335118
Most antinatalists were here at some point, I just hope this much is clear to you at least. Maybe they weren't thinking exactly these words, but at some point in their lives ,they would agree with you, and something (unimaginable to you, or absurd sounding) happened that changed their opinion.

>>16335117
Lol. You are a very, very mentally ill person and need to get your priorities straight. Yes, I'm a sociopath for wanting people to get over their depression, sure.

>>16335054
My grandma died in january. The last words I heard from her when I went to visit her at the hospital were "I just wanna die". She used to be and adventurer, wear cool leather jackets and travel all around the globe doing crazy stuff. In her last days there was almost no hair in her head, her skin was greenish, she was just falling apart.

It ruined me to see her that way. And I'm already dying inside to imagine I may have to see this happening to my mom. It's a nightmare and there's no way to wake up.

>>16335127
It's the opposite, also I'm not OP. There seems to be at least 3 different anti-natalists in this thread. You seem to believe it's impossible that someone has worked hard or fought hard and could still be unhappy. That's the key issue. You believe unhappiness can literally only stem from weakness.

It's a common belief, and I've seen so many people belief this and it literally only ever changes if it happens to them too. Of course to many people it doesn't happen and that's why your belief is so common. But it happens to some. It's really not that mindblowing if you think about it.

>>16335104
>I'm much better than I used to be, but my existential dread has not subsided. And I don't think it ever will.
That's your depression talking. Just keep working at it, baby steps, and stop visiting this hellhole of a site. It's not good for your mental health.

>NOT A SINGLE REACTION FROM OP TO THE FACT THAT APPLYING THE CONCEPT OF CONSENT TO A NON-EXISTING ENTITY IS A MEANINGLESS CATEGORY MISTAKE AND COMPLETE NONSENSE

>>16335139
>You believe unhappiness can literally only stem from weakness.
This is true though. Why are there poor, handicapped people who had every ounce of bad luck available, yet who are still happy in life? Because of how they deal with the hardships of life. They have resilience.
I've gone through depression, anon. I've been on both sides and know what I'm talking about.

>>16334793
I'm an antinatalist because I deem it cruel to put people in this world. However I don't think people who want to have people are in the wrong, they have the freedom to commit selfish acts.

>>16335116
>if you were to look at life completely soberly without your attachments and passions clouding your judgment, you wouldn't say '' life is a good thing''.
Yes you would, unless you were depressed.

>>16335136
I'm sorry she had to go through that, and I'm sorry you had to witness it too. It was similar with my grandpa and grandma as well. My grandfather once told me, many years prior, that as a man we couldn't complain everytime something hurts or we'd complain all the time ,and that was a valuable life lesson for sure.
But then seeing how he was at the end of his life and the things were saying, that basically went against that 100%, it definitely impacts you.

The thing is, there is no guarantee this has to happen to us or the ones we love. You never know if we might, despite all struggles, have a peaceful ending, or some other thing of the sort. At least you can also know within you that you understood the pain in your grandma more than most other people, and that empathy is one of the hardest qualities to develop in this life, it seems. I sincerely hope the best for you and your family.

>>16335145
never go full retard

>>16335145
It's what I'm telling you anon. This is called survivorship bias. It's the definition of it. You are focusing on the poor people who had all the bad luck and survived. There are also poor people with bad luck who died and are miserable (droves of them). You are choosing to call them weak and focus on the survivors and call them normal. It's a cognitive bias.

>>16335079
Don't know about that. Antinatalist arguments seem pretty rational at a mor level, unlike thosr in favor of giving birth. Just look at this thread.

Also, you're just gaslighting. Nazi Doctor tier opinion.

>>16335136
Welcome to life. If you can't take that, might as well end it now. Sorry about your grandma by the way, mine was in a similar state, and that experience actually made me realize the value of life.

>>16335159
>>16335152

Notice the difference in responses to someone's suffering in a natalist and an anti-natalist. Lol.

>>16335153
That's what the depressed antinatalists do
>>16335157
Have you ever read a history book? Normal means according to the norm, and that is the norm. Depressed unhappy people are not the norm, so not normal.

>>16335158
They're not rational, they're depressed. And seem rational to other depressed individuals who think life is all suffering.

>>16335151
Nice argument.
>Depressed people think that life is not a good thing, therefore everyone who thinks life is not a good thing is depressed.
Woah. Just take not thinking life is a good thing as the definition for being depressed and then this whole shit is just meaningless tautologies.

>>16335119
Fine. But if we apply this logic to a person that didn’t do much but suffer in their life, wouldn’t it have been better if that specific person hadn’t been born?

>>16335166
No one is arguing all life is suffering. The argument is that the amount of happiness is far smaller than the amount of suffering.

>>16335163
You think history books during the slavery were describing how unhappy slaves were? "History is written by the victors" (incidentally this is also just survivorship bias as well).

>>16335172
It's true though. Yes, depressed people see life as a bottomless well of suffering, just like the antinatalists, while mentally healthy people don't. This conversation wouldn't exist without anons trying to cope with their depression by projecting it onto all humanity.

>>16335180
Slaves weren't as unhappy as you would think, otherwise they'd all have committed suicide. They had faith/religion to keep them upright. You lack an understanding of how people behave.

>>16335142
That makes no sense to me, because once the entity comes to consciousness it already exists, and all the points about suffering still stand.

Your child WILL suffer once alive. The only question is: will it be able to tolerate it? How much and how intensely will it experience pain? Will it say "yes" or "no" if you ask it "was being born worth it?" in the future?

You don't know. There's no way to know. So you're basically gambling with another being's life.

>>16335178
>The argument is that the amount of happiness is far smaller than the amount of suffering.
But it's not and only looks that way if you're depressed.

>>16335178
>The argument is that the amount of happiness is far smaller than the amount of suffering.

>>16335188
Holy fuck, how clueless can you get. You should screenshot this and read this again in a few years.
They incidentally had a religion that says they will burn in hell forever if they commit suicide, and slave owners that were watching for any attempts of escape and suicide. Just a coincidence though.
"Slaves weren't that unhappy". Holy fucking shit.
I sometimes don't know how to feel that it's people like you who keep putting children into the world.

>>16335173
Yes, that is correct, but as long as total happiness is more than suffering, it is your moral duty to create as much life as you possibly could.
You cannot use one case for all immorality though because then basically all actions would be immoral.

>>16334793
To me the problem is that people who want to have children can't cope with it being a selfish act. If they admitted that to themselves they could have children without having to resort to mental gymnastics to justify themselves.

>>16335185
Define depression and what it means to be mentally healthy.

>>16335195
Most slaves weren't that unhappy.

>>16334882
Unquantifiable means you can't adequately explain something. It doesn't mean that something doesnt exist.

>>16335178
>The argument is that the amount of happiness is far smaller than the amount of suffering
Even then, most people would say that they’d rather been born than not. It’s not all suffering and pleasure for which one determines if life is worth living. Morality is also not derived from suffering and happiness only.

>>16335189
>That makes no sense to me
It eliminates your point concerning consent, presented here >>16334842. You now have only half an argument, namely:

>The only question is: will it be able to tolerate it? How much and how intensely will it experience pain? Will it say "yes" or "no" if you ask it "was being born worth it?" in the future?
There is a way to know. For as long as suicide rates are lower than the rate of people dying of old age, you have the answer.

>>16335200
Anti natalists shine a new light on this meme
>t. Antinatalists

>>16335195
Stop drinking the onions. Slaves had it bad but still weren't as depressed as current day westerners. If you're depressed you physically can't work, even if someone made you. Your entire argument makes no sense and is based completely on sentimentality. You also seem to forget that almost every culture on earth used to have slaves and most of them had pretty decent lives.
>I sometimes don't know how to feel that it's people like you who keep putting children into the world.
Whew lad, just end it now and you'll never have to worry about it again.

>>16335194
You can't objectively measure pleasure and pain and I speak only for myself, I don't mean to convert anyone. The thought of putting in the world someone who could find that pain outweights happiness is enough for me to be an antinatalist.

>>16335202
Read the DSM.

>>16335198
Why don't you have 12 children then, anon? Doesn't matter if they starve right, the real moral choice is to make as many little monkeys as you can.

>>16335200
How is absence of pleasure not bad when absence of pain is good?
Also having it as one slide is stupid. Going outside in a walk would cause some pain, but it would create more happiness, but if you judged it on your pic both doing it and not doing it would be the same.

>>16335225
>>16335223
>black and white thinking, key symptom of depression

>>16335223
>You can't objectively measure pleasure and pain
This fact kills the utilitarian.

>>16335198
>>16335058
>too big brain for Anti-Nats

>>16335222
>You also seem to forget that almost every culture on earth used to have slaves and most of them had pretty decent lives.
It amazes me how well you can speak on behalf of everyone and how much they love their lives when they literally had to be tortured to continue doing what they were doing. It's literally dystopia level talk right there, that someone like you dares to call someone like me irrational, lol.
These threads are always pointless. There will be no suffering in this world that will seem legitimate to you unless it happens to you. Congratulations on having a monkey level IQ and only being able to understand things if you experience them first hand.

Weirdly, even though I despise people like you, I don't wish that you ever learn how wrong you are. I am gonna stop reading the stupidity in this thread though. Good luck to the anti-natalists that stay.

>>16335225
Because I don’t actually think whether it’s worth to create life is actually dependant on a total of suffering versus pleasure on a scale.

>>16335198
I don’t think I’m able to appreciate happiness enough to understand why one could believe all the suffering in the world is worth it. I’d like to, but I don’t see how that’s possible.

>>16335227
Having your wallet stolen is worse than not finding free money.

>>16335232
Suffering is the image of purpose.
There's no pain without purpose.

>>16335232
The projection is near immeasurable in this post. Man, I hate depressed cunts who think the world is just like the insides of their petty minds.
You have absolutely no idea of how pre-modern civilizations treated slaves and the institutions of slavery, yet accuse me of
>only being able to understand things if you experience them first hand.
while that's exactly what you're doing. Holy shit lol, the ampunt of cope.

>>16334828
I wonder how many antinatalists actually adopt, to reduce muh suffering. I’d guess around none

>>16335252
I wonder how many come to the conclusion that the only end point of their philosophy is to end themselves. They're probably too cowardly.

>>16335248
I'd be hard pressed to present a bigger cope.

It's so annoying hearing this one retard calling everyone he disagrees with depressed while not defining what he means by it.

>>16335252
>>16335258
>>16335248
>breeders in denial

>>16335271
There is a clear definition of depression in the DSM, go look it up and you'll see.

>>16335274
t. depressed bugman

>>16335258
Not at all. Living means accepting both pain and pleasure, I don't off myself because as I'm already alive. Willing someone else who has yet to exist to endure this same condition is another matter.

>>16335276
>muh dictionary argument
Is thinking that life is not a good thing enough to be considered depressed or not?

>>16335283
But that means you're also denying them the chance of living a happy life because of your skewed outlook.

>>16335263
Without meaning you can't suffer.
You suffer because you miss your purpose, you're off the track, you're lost. But the pain is proof of the existence of the path, I don't know where it leads for you, but you have to find it.

>>16334824
>My life is shitty because I never worked to make it enjoyable therefore life is shit for everyone
Nice projection, retard

>>16335291
“Them”? Who is that?

>>16335291
Not having to endure pain outweights missing the chance to experience pleasure.

>>16335290
Yes because if it were true for everyone we wouldn't be here. Mentally healthy people don't think like that.

>>16335298
Yeah broh, everything good in your life is a resulf of your hard work and everything bad in other people's lives is just a result of them being lazy and worthless unlike you

>>16335301
That's an opinion and your skewed opinion is forced onto your potential offspring. It's not a universal truth.
>>16335299
>someone else who has yet to exist

>>16335291
But that doesn't matter, because a being that never existed cannot miss happiness they never experienced.

But once you know for 100% certainty there is any amount of suffering in existence, it is immoral to throw the dice by bringing a being to life.

>>16335297
Jesus Christ, this dude

So, having this thread leafed through, I've come up with an average portrait of an anti-natalist
>sees a therapist
>has a depression
>had a childhood trauma not overcome
>has psychological or bodily disorders
The conclusion invites itself: anti-natalists are just deficient people. There is also a great irony in the thought that all their arguments are just rationalization of this deficiency. So, we should all just welcome anti-natalists because they are doing the Nature's work: screening out of the weak. As good old Nietzsche once said:
>That which is ready to fall, shall ye also push!
Call me a sociopath or whatever, see if I care.

>>16335307
Would you rather get robbed or not winning the lottery?

>>16335298
You're a retarded sociopath.

>>16335308
>But that doesn't matter, because a being that never existed cannot miss happiness they never experienced.

No you're denying them the chance of deciding for themselves whether or not life is worth living, now you're forcing your skewed opinion onto potential others.
>But once you know for 100% certainty there is any amount of suffering in existence, it is immoral to throw the dice by bringing a being to life.
Retarded depressed take anon. Typical black and white thinking. You think it's immoral based on your experience, but not everyone shares your experience.

AN threads are the best thing about nu-/lit/. Perhaps the sole redeeming re-curring event we have these days.

>>16335317
Nice ad hominem.

>>16335322
Stop this black and white nonsense.

>>16335308
>any amount of suffering
>any amount

>>16335330
He's correct though. I've yet to meet an antinatalist who is not heavily depressed.

>>16335303
So you are basically calling people you disagree with names. It doesn't mean anything.

>>16335317
You're a genius hon, please come fuck my boipussy

>>16335246
That’s fine, no need to cry about it to normal people who can appreciate it though

>>16335325
>No you're denying them the chance of deciding for themselves whether or not life is worth living, now you're forcing your skewed opinion onto potential others.
If I put another human in this world he could come to the conclusion that life is worth it or it isn't worth it. In the first case it's all good, in the second he's shit out of luck and the fault is mine.

>>16335315
Physical pain is literally a signal you get to avoid something, and pleasure to attain/keep something.
It's literally goal oriented.

>>16335337
No, that's not what I'm doing. I'm stating a fact. Look up the symptoms of depression and you'll see that every proponent of antinatalism fits the bill. Mentally happy people can't actually entertain this line of thought, it has nothing to do with calling names.

>>16335331
That's not an argument. Elaborate.

>>16335330
Why it is an ad-hominem? Is it really so hard to grasp that a depressed person will always be opposed to life no matter the arguments?

>>16335342
>If I put another human in this world he could come to the conclusion that life is worth it or it isn't worth it.
Yes.
> In the first case it's all good, in the second he's shit out of luck and the fault is mine
You're not that important anon. Stop being such a narcissistic victim. If your child comes to that concusion it's the child's responsibility, not yours. Just like it's not your parents' fault that you're depressed now.

>>16334976
The whole problem with your logic is that you assume life is more pain than joy for EVERYONE, the truth is that it's not.
If life was so horrible, no one would have kids, because yes, it would be bringing someone to an awful world.
The truth is that, despite your depressive views, the majority of people are glad to be alive, and that doesn't negate suffering.
Suffering is part of life, you either take it blindly and moan for its existence, or you try to understand why you are suffering, what it can bring you, what it can teach you, how you can escape it by actually improving your life.
Even war and genocide have things to teach us, even in the dead of the night, there is hope for light to shine again. It is my belief that enormous pain opens your eyes and make you more aware and loving.
I used to be despondent like you, but I can assure that life is worth living, maybe you'll see it in time, I wish that you will.

>>16335349
Neither was yours an honest proposition. Try again.

>>16335307
Natalists usually argue that it’s pointless to argue about “someone who has yet to exist” because... well, they don’t exist. It’s pointless to apply any ideas or moral concepts to them.

>>16335347
Ergo, Happiness/meaningfulness is not pain or pleasure, but the reaching of your most valued goals. Pleasure is a side effect. Anti-nats literally can't grasp this. The universe shall will your consciousness into existence again and again until you fulfill your duty. Only then will you have relief.

>>16335348
Don't you see how this is circular?

>>16335368
No, it's straight. Be depressed -> project your feelings onto the world -> antinatalism.

>>16335325
You can’t deny a non-existent person anything.

>>16335342
How widely to you actually use this? Let’s say, do you ever drive? Even though most times it is all good, you have a chance to kill someone, and then they’re out of luck and the fault is yours.
This could be applied to many actions you do every day, but you don’t

>>16335373
You can deny them life, genius.

>>16335373
Not him, but he was referring to the "being", not the "person".

>>16334842
What if I produce children with these arguments in mind? Will the antinatalist police arrest me?

>>16335341
That’s not what I’m doing. Quite the contrary, I hope everyone gets all the happiness they can, and I’d like to understand why so many people believe even the worst suffering is worth it. I’m not complaining to anyone.

>>16335348
Most people are Hylics and NPCs, anon. You can't make comparisons based on the majority because they are too stupid to question their lives and beliefs at any meaningful level.

By the way, you're just spewing anedotical evidence and ad populum to prove your point, there's nothing sophisticate about that. To invalidate a point of view because your opposer is "crazy" is a very cruel and lowly tool of debate.

>>16335358
Victim? I don't resent my parents for putting me here, not at all. On the contrary my family is one of the best things in my life.
I hold myself accountable for my actions, this doesn't mean I think I'm important. I simply wish no misfortune on others so just like I do my best to treat my fellow human with kindness I won't be responsible for the possible suffering of who has yet to exist.

>>16335374
Not him but I actually do not drive because of this reason, I am 100% certain that if I drive I'll end up screwing up and killing someone or myself.

>>16335363
Explain how it wasn't then.

>>16335358
>and then the monster showed its claws

>>16335372
You just outright said that mentally healthy people can't disagree with you. Your ''argument'' is:
>Mentally ill people think life is bad Only mentally ill people thing life is bad.

>>16335387
>Most people are Hylics and NPCs, anon. You can't make comparisons based on the majority because they are too stupid to question their lives and beliefs at any meaningful level.
Not my problem.
>By the way, you're just spewing anedotical evidence and ad populum to prove your point, there's nothing sophisticate about that. To invalidate a point of view because your opposer is "crazy" is a very cruel and lowly tool of debate.
Not if it's correct. Which it is. They're literally "crazy" in the sense that they cannot argue rationally due to their mental illness.

>>16335374
I can drive in such a way that I have no fault if someone else ends up suffering because of it. Yes, I despise those who don't drive carefully.

>>16335388
> In the first case it's all good, in the second he's shit out of luck and the fault is mine
> I don't resent my parents for putting me here, not at all. On the contrary my family is one of the best things in my life.
At least be consistent in your arguments.

>>16335376
Does that mean humanity is denying infinite potential people life?

>>16335305
I had my fair share of suffering, more than the average man, I will tell you that much. But it also taught me a lot, and yes, sometimes the source of pain is inescapable, sometimes, no matter how hard you work, all will fail, and I know the sheer feeling of hopelessness associated with such a trail of events.
I know that sometimes you suffer to the hands of fate, and that you have no influence in the matter.

But you can find peace, all you have to do is find your meaning, as someone said earlier in the thread, pain is the manifestation of the path, until you find the path, you will suffer.
He who has a why to live can bear almost any how.

>>16335394
Yes. It's also correct. Mentally healthy people by definition don't view life in such negative terms, only mentally ill people do.

>>16335379
Is there a meaningful difference I’m missing?

>>16335360
That's not at all my point. I'm saying that suffering exists, being born is not consensual at that there's NO WAY you cam know how your offspring's life will turn out.

People across the most fucked up moments in history kept having children, because most could never even fathom anh other way of life. I can see that even now when I speak about antinatalism with people around me. They get so shocked because they never even slightly questioned the ethical implications of bringing a mortal conscious being to this world.

>>16335408
Only if it's a conscious choice, obviously.

>>16335212
I know what "quantifiable" means, you infinitesimal pinprick. (You) >>16334856 said that it's not quantifiable as if we should immediately discard it from any arguments. Then you go on to use something equally unquantifiable, enjoying living, as additional evidence for an argument you've done little more than make the implication of. I don't even know why I'm replying.

>>16335403
So if I bring up my child in a way that doesn’t make suffering my fault, that is fine?
If they’re born in pain, that’s like a good car breaking and hitting someone for whatever reason, and if they become sad of other reasons, that would probably be their own or others or no ones, and not mine.

>>16335387
Without God you can't make moral claims, so you must admit God for you anti-natalist views, but now God the Father of all life is immoral to you. So now you're gnostic, but gnosticism is self-refuting since the highest is still cause of everything indirectly and thus if anything is so evil that it shouldn't be then the highest is evil for having caused it. The.
Or again, you willed to exist not your parents.

>>16335415
Yes.

>>16334793
>it's another "decadent retard uses morality to deny life" episode

>>16335384
You bet your ass we will. We know where you live, Jason

>>16335415
>Is there a meaningful difference I’m missing?
Yeah

>>16335406
I am. You're missing the point: the living and those who have yet to live are not comparable. All in all I consider myself lucky with my dice roll, this doesn't mean I'm reckless enough to cast the die for someone else.

>>16335389
That sounds like a problem with you though, and as I explain, it doesn’t even have to be your fault, you just have to be involved. If you go out and walk, someone might see you and decide they don’t want to be on the same side of the road as you, and then cross the road, and get hit by a car. Will you not go outside then?

>>16335424
Explain.

>>16335416
>they get so shocked
You're not shocking them, they're just flabbergasted at how much of a retard you are lmao

>>16335360
Holy fuck bro you are basically posting “live laugh love” in response

>>16335423
holy kekes====s

why does morality need God?

Morality is ruined by God

>>16335431
No, you're missing the point. You were arguing about the hypothetical offspring.
>this doesn't mean I'm reckless enough to cast the die for someone else.
You seem to think it's reckless but it's not. You're just not willing to deal with potential negative outcomes of your choices.

>>16335422
>So if I bring up my child in a way that doesn’t make suffering my fault, that is fine?
If only there was a way. Even the best parents in the world can't make sure their child will be happy. Besides, comparing an human being with a car is disingenuous.

>>16335435
It was hypothetical.

>>16335441
>Holy fuck bro you are basically posting “live laugh love” in response
Uhh.... Is he based, /lit/?

>>16335416
Do you live in a third world country, or in extreme poverty? My guess is no, because you're here.
>People across the most fucked up moments in history kept having children
That's a very interesting statement, why do you think that is? Anti-natalism as a widely accepted ideology is very modern, and one could argue, localized almost entirely in the first world, usually adopted by middle class/upper class individuals.
Why does it seem that only in the most abondant societies, and among those societies, only the most fortunate decide not to have children? You ancestors weren't dumber than you are, why do you think they kept on having children despite the enormous pain and suffering they went through?

Maybe you don't suffer enough to understand the value of life, or maybe your suffering has no sense, no meaning.

>>16335447
Maybe happiness isn't the end goal, have you considered that?

>>16335441
Yes

>>16335451
Actually good post.

>>16335409
Problem is this world gives no one instruments to discover their "why", and it can be argued that such thing is a delusion. Most people discover sooner or later life is meaningless in itself, even though they don't realize it. So they have to create this "why" you speak of. 99% of the time, is putting more children into the machine while thinking yourself as the provider. It's a circle of torment. The Ouroboros

>>16335444
>You're just not willing to deal with potential negative outcomes of your choices.
Precisely, I won't be responsible for the suffering of another fellow human. A suffering that I can't do nothing about.

>>16335456
So the point of life is a spook then?

>>16335456
How can I know my child will hold such a view? There's the possibilty he will just hate life.

>>16335461
>Precisely, I won't be responsible for the suffering of another fellow human.
>Precisely, I won't be responsible for the suffering of another fellow human.
You are already. And by doing this you're also denying a potentional being the chance at good life, which is very selfish of you.
>.A suffering that I can't do nothing about.
Jesus christ stop being such a victim. If that were true, every depressed person would stay depressed. Surprise: Many don't, they recover, and have overcome their suffering.

>>16335456
Yes. That is exactly the point. Happiness doesn't matter one bit, waht matters is the avoidance of suffering, which is guaranteed by not bringing a thing that could suffer.

>>16335447
>Even the best parents in the world can't make sure their child will be happy
You also cannot drive in a way that makes sure there cannot be an accident.
But they can make sure it’s not their fault that the child is unhappy. Most people are not so because their parents has brought them up bringing them pain.
What’s wrong with my car?

>>16335470
You can't. There's also the possibility he will love life and will be thankful that you put him on this rock.
The black and white way you view life is very unhealthy.

>>16335432
>That sounds like a problem with you though
I never said it wasn't
>and as I explain, it doesn’t even have to be your fault, you just have to be involved
But that's the thing, if I drive I am completely sure that I will make a mistake and get into an accident
>If you go out and walk, someone might see you and decide they don’t want to be on the same side of the road as you, and then cross the road, and get hit by a car. Will you not go outside then?
That one I don't actually see as being my fault, it certainly wasn't intentional and I am forced to go outside against my will anyway. If I could I would actually stay inside all day.

>>16335460
Would you want to live in a world where finding your why isn't a lifelong quest, or at least, a difficult one? A world where all the keys are given to you at birth, only for you to live in the most numbing and dumb shallow happiness one could imagine? I certainly wouldn't

>>16335423
Your argument falls to the ground in the first sentence. Morality needs no God, as God needs no morality. As far as I know, if God exists he's a sadist cunt or maybe he just doesn't give fuck. You assume the existence of an All Powerful Creator implies that he is good and moral, which is a lie.

How do Natalists reconcile with the fact that they are responsible for my immense level of suffering right in this very moment, as a direct result of their abhorrent shitposting?

>>16335474
>waht matters is the avoidance of suffering
No, overcoming suffering is what matters. That's how you grow as a person. Not by avoiding.
>>16335462
That's not what I said. Just that happiness might not be it in itself.

WAAAH IM A LOSER I DIDNT CONSENT TO BEING BORN.

that's why everyone is born with an out out button, suicide. Kids never commit suicide because they aren't losers

>>16335490
Kill yourself then.

>>16335492
>he thinks that you have to be a loser to kill yourself

Childlike really

>>16335492
>Kids never commit suicide
What the hell?

>>16335490
>How do Natalists reconcile with the fact that they are responsible for my immense level of suffering right in this very moment, as a direct result of their abhorrent shitposting?
I can't speak for all natalists, but it personally grants me an immense amount of pleasure.

>>16335470
You are obsessed with attaining certainty, and the basest certainty you have is that of suffering. Once you embrace uncertainty, you will also see that suffering is a choice.

>>16335409
Democritus has some nice quotes about this. (He was an anti-natalist for selfish reasons.)
All anti-natalists should read him.
>Moderation multiplies pleasures, and increases pleasure.
>If your desires are not great, a little will seem much to you; for small appetite makes poverty equivalent to wealth.
>Seek after the good, and with much toil shall ye find it; the evil turns up of itself without your seeking it.
>Men achieve tranquillity through moderation in pleasure and through the symmetry of life. Want and superfluity are apt to upset them and to cause great perturbations in the soul. The souls that are rent by violent conflicts are neither stable nor tranquil. One should therefore set his mind upon the things that are within his power, and be content with his opportunities, nor let his memory dwell very long on the envied and admired of men, nor idly sit and dream of them. Rather, he should contemplate the lives of those who suffer hardship, and vividly bring to mind their sufferings, so that your own present situation may appear to you important and to be envied, and so that it may no longer be your portion to suffer torture in your soul by your longing for more. For he who admires those who have, and whom other men deem blest of fortune, and who spends all his time idly dreaming of them, will be forced to be always contriving some new device because of his [insatiable] desire, until he ends by doing some desperate deed forbidden by the laws. And therefore one ought not to desire other men's blessings, and one ought not to envy those who have more, but rather, comparing his life with that of those who fare worse, and laying to heart their sufferings, deem himself blest of fortune in that he lives and fares so much better than they. Holding fast to this saying you will pass your life in greater tranquillity and will avert not a few of the plagues of life—envy and jealousy and bitterness of mind.

>>16335485
>If I could I would actually stay inside all day.
The average antinatalist
> But that's the thing, if I drive I am completely sure that I will make a mistake and get into an accident
Sure, but the argument I respond to in the context of antinatalism makes it so that it doesn’t matter who brings on the suffering, but only that suffering is.
Also, some anon in this thread might start hating life after these responses and kill himself, so even saying inside on 4chan isn’t safe

>>16335502
pre pubescent children commiting suicide is extremely uncommon

>>16335503
Bro you can't just go around deriving pleasure from the suffering you cause to other people

>>16334954
Absolutely based and true

>>16335487
Not him but I absolutely would.

Fuck this "you have to suffer" bullshit, I'd prefer to live in a world where I could be happy all the time and never get tired if it.

anti natalists just seem to ignore the people that enjoy their lives, where's the proof most people are unhappy and don't want to live, even random obese americans get a lot of pleasure out of eating macdonalds

>NOOO YOU ARE SECRTELY UNHAPPY NOOOOO

>>16335510
>Le reddit moving the goalposts strategy

>>16335030
Please for the love of god go back

>>16335509
I'm not an antinatalist though.

>>16335514
Weak. That's like playing life with cheat codes and will give you no sense of worth whatsoever because you did nothing to attain your state of being.

>>16335451
I'm Brazilian, so yes. From a third world shithole. I work at a Support House for low income cancer patients and it's all dreadful, you have no idea. I'm trying my best to reduce the suffering of those I can, but everytime I do so it just confirms to me that antinatalism is the right choice.

Also, all that crap about pain having meaning is just 200 oz. of copium. Pain is inherently meaningless unless there's an observer to rationalize it.

>>16335522
I don't give a shit, I'm sick of this fucking life, my only wish is to gather the will to overcome my survival instinct and finally kill myself.

>>16335526
>Pain is inherently meaningless unless there's an observer to rationalize it.
Why can't you be that observer yourself?

>>16335521
No? Well, I just found it funny, you seem good, but I still think it’s stupid to think it’s bad to drive, and going outside, but you don’t seem to think that’s universal, but only for you, which is fine, I mean, I guess it’s pretty bad actually, but then I mistook your thoughts for arguments.

>>16335534
Godspeed anon. I hope you find a way to overcome your suffering.

>>16335515
>>NOOO YOU ARE SECRTELY UNHAPPY NOOOOO
That's actually true though.

>>16335472
>Surprise: Many don't, they recover, and have overcome their suffering.
So you admit there's the possibilty he couldn't recover. Here lies my point.

>>16335535
He never said you couldn't be, dumbass.

>>16335451
Also, I already said: they kept having children because they would never question the most common occurence in nature, they never thought of the ethical implications of consciousness.

It's a lie to say it's a modern concept. The Borborites ate fetuses with honey because they were antinatalist. It was also a pretty common view among Greek philosophers. Antinatalism is a complex philosophical and moral stance per excellence.

>>16334793
Their excuse for not endorsing suicide is pretty bullshit

>>16335546
In this life*

>>16335546
Sure. But there's no guaranteeing either way. Work hard and you'll probably overcome it, give up and you probably won't. So your point is pointless.

>>16335545
Wrong, but you are secretly happy

>>16335522
The thing is that any “weakness” or “meaning” or “overcoming suffering” isn’t there in this hypothetical world where you’re guaranteed eternal happiness. Unless you’re religious (totally fine btw) there’s really no good reason to not accept such a world.

>>16335558
What are you talking about?

>>16335553
>AN: "I don't think people ought to have children"
>(You): -"So why don't you kill yourself?"
>AN: "What?"
>(You): -"What a bullshit excuse for not killing yourself you got there, Mr AN."

AN: pic related

>>16335477
If I'm driving safely I have no fault. The suffering of my child is something I allowed to happen, a risk I took when I decided to create him.

>>16335545
I'm religious, owned

>>16335555
Exactly what democritus said.
Work hard and you might find joy, don't abd there'll be only pain. There'll be pain either way, but one way will be only pain
Also. Based. Checked.

>>16335563
more like

AN: wwaaaahh life is so bad it's suffering i hate myself i wish I was never born
you: well there's an easy solution to that

>>16335561
>>16335487
This, just a few responses back.

>>16335487
Sounds great. Isn't that the Christian idea of Heaven, which most people in the West adhere to?

>>16335420
You're replying because you want my cock

>>16335563
Midwit.
Check your categorical presuppositions

>>16335564
If you're raising well you have no fault either. But given your depressed state of mind I imagine you're not fit for raising children and will end up transferring your depressed worldview onto them.

>>16335505
I will hold dearly to the certainty of not having caused pain, yes.

>>16335570
>AN: wwaaaahh life is so bad it's suffering i hate myself i wish I was never born

That's just your projection. No AN ever said that.

>>16335580
Whoa you said fancy words, you won the faggot war.

>>16334842
imagine being this fucking bitter
what the fuck happened to you?

>>16335563
They claim that suicide isn't endorsed because it adds too much suffering, despite the fact that momentary pain will be much less net suffering than living for several more decades, and AN is all about preventing net suffering. I'm not saying "why don't you kill yourself" but suicide should be pretty ethical by these standards. Even murder should. People will never stop having the urge to procreate, so forced global abortion and sterilization for everyone or just literally nuking the earth until no conscious life has a chance of evolving, would be by far the most moral option to prevent as much suffering as possible.

>>16335575
>The thing is that any “weakness” or “meaning” or “overcoming suffering” isn’t there in this hypothetical world where you’re guaranteed eternal happiness. Unless you’re religious (totally fine btw) there’s really no good reason to not accept such a world.
What hypothetical world are you talking about?

>>16335564
There’s a risk of an accident happening whenever you drive.
It’s a risk you take when you decide to drive.
I seriously don’t really understand what your post is actually trying to do, what’s the logic here?

Every single one of us is unironically programmed to not kill ourselves regardless of living conditions. Feelsbadman

>>16335487
/thread.
Go and overdose on heroin.
Did you never try cheat codes in games as a kid all the time? But later sought harder and harder experiences?
Anti natalists have no real life experienced, challenge is what gives meaning to meaning

>>16335587
>AN is all about preventing net suffering.
No but I see exactly why lots of people believe that, though.

>>16335582
That's retarded because you can't. No matter what you do it will cause pain to someone in some way. Better to embrace uncertainty.

>>16335587
>People will never stop having the urge to procreate, so forced global abortion and sterilization for everyone or just literally nuking the earth until no conscious life has a chance of evolving, would be by far the most moral option to prevent as much suffering as possible.
Yes

>>16335583
You are not your future self, every moment of your life you force life upon the future perceiver who will be forced to identify themselves as the loser that is you. Was what that posy about category meant.

>>16335591
The same is true for creating life, but antinatalists are supposed to think of it logically and not act just on instinct, but why does this only apply to creating life and not suicide?

>>16335508
>find happiness by remebering a lot of people are suffering more than you

That's literally a sociopathic argument. Only a person incapable of empathy would find joy in other people's pain.

>>16335582
If you choose to not have children you might cause pain to your family. How do you deal with that?

>>16335593
It's literally the entire point of this retarded ideology. "Suffering is bad so creating a being which will suffer is immoral." I can't see any reason why standing by and allowing the system of life to continue to exist when it births so much raw suffering is anything but highly immoral. The only reason it's not is a cop out about only being concerned about yourself and your own personal choices, which is only because AN want to feel superior for making the monumental choice of not procreating while looking down on others from their cushy lives.

>>16335555
I agree with that. Again, I simply refuse to force someone to go through the whole ordeal.

>>16335599
Your average "anti-natalist" will get upset at the idea though.

>>16335611
>being illiterate
It's reversed envy. You dumb cunt

>>16335612
Euthanasia for the family

>>16335535
Because I can see it's a larp, a great cope. I don't have the delusional will to actually believe that.

>>16335622
The problem is with your thinking. You see life as an ordeal. Other people see life as an experience, an opportunity. What if your hypothetical offspring were to see it that way but you denied them that because you decided for them that it's an ordeal? Life doesn't have to be an ordeal.

Gee, another thread full of anti natalists getting thoroughly btfo.
You fags are seriously better off not even starting arguments and just hoping the 15 year olds who make up 75% of your followers don't grow up.

>>16335629
Why is it delusional? Just because you're too depressed to view it that way at the moment doesn't mean it's impossible. It's only a cope if you have nothing to live for.

>>16335622
Sure but it doesn't really matter. Not doing something immoral is the bare minimum and not any kind of achievement or noble sacrifice. You should be actively trying to prevent others from procreating, by force if necessary.

>>16335589
Driving concerns the living. Anyone who goes out is aware of what could happen go him and accepts that. A child who has yet to be created can't consent to the risks.

>>16335623
That's why there is efilism.

>>16335649
>You should be actively trying to prevent others from procreating, by force if necessary.
Why do you hate yourself so?

>>16335526
I don't see why antinatalism is the answer here and not euthanasia desu senpai

>>16335650
Nor can they refuse. You're making that choice for them. Why are AN so selfish?

>>16335586
You just need eyes and a heart to know those things, anon. Look around you. If you think life is worthy because yours is not that bad, ignoring the billions that are suffering right now, you're beyond salvation.

Also, I bet my white ass that not a single person in this world is 100% happy right now. We are all suffering, for different reasons and with varying degrees of intensity.

This is hell. Life is hell.

>>16335655
I'm not an antinatalist, but antinatalist are cowards who don't live by their own ideology beyond patting themselves on the back for making an extremely easy choice.

>>16335612
That pain is far smaller than the one I'm avoiding. If you want a personal answer my family won't hold it against me.

>>16335656
Because they're too cowardly to see through to the end of their philosophy and will keep coping because secretly they revel in their whining and sulking.

>>16335660
>That pain is far smaller than the one I'm avoiding
So you don't have the certainty of not having inflicted pain? You're just a hypocrite who is unwilling to face life head on.

>>16335587
OP here. I agree. That's why I believe in the Nuclear Dharma. If it were for me, I'd nuke the Moon to end this planet. The unimaginable suffering of a single human being is not justifiable by the happiness of 6 billion others. Life is a mistake.

>>16335630
>What if your hypothetical offspring were to see it that way but you denied them that because you decided for them that it's an ordeal?
I can't know that. We're going in circles, I'm just exposing my line of thought, not trying to force it on other if that wasn't clear.

>>16335664
Certified depressed retard. Stop projecting.

>already hit the bump limit
holy autism

>>16335649
I wouldn't deny a fellow human of his freedom. Everyone is responsible for his own actions alone.

>>16335667
You're exposing your circular reasoning yes. You present your opinion as a fact, and that's what I'm arguing about.

>>16335617
>"Suffering is bad so creating a being which will suffer is immoral."
Who are you quoting, specifically?
inb4 the standard "All AN:s say this"

>>16335678
Have you actually read this thread? That's what their argument boils down to whether you like it or not.

>>16335674
So you allow your fellow humans the freedom to do something as highly immoral as creating a new being which will suffer? Do you "allow" your fellow human beings the freedom to rape and murder? Exactly how immoral is procreation to you?

>>16335657
Because avoiding pain is more valuable than not having happiness. And having a child is about the parents and their desires, that's selfish.

>>16335670
>depressed
I hate that fucking word, it creates that fake sense of a diagnosis, like the person is not worth arguing or speaking with, when it's just, as it is used in most cases, another insult like loser or something

>>16335683
> something as highly immoral as creating a new being which will suffer?
How is that immoral? It's only immoral if you view suffering as a bad thing. Which it doesn't have to be. Your argument is nonsense.

>>16335678
Do you have the kindness within you to tell us the "real idea" behind AN or are you just going to say this one is wrong because you don't like seeing it worded that way?

>>16335690
>Because avoiding pain is more valuable than not having happiness
No it's not. Overcoming pain is how you grow as a person. Shit take honestly.
>And having a child is about the parents and their desires, that's selfish.
No it's not, it only exposes how selfish you are that that's how you view children and project it onto others.

>>16335693
Sorry anon I thought you were an anti-natalist, my bad.

>>16335662
I have minimized pain. I do face my life, I just won't force another one to live.

>>16335650
That’s fine, what if the person you hit is a child, or this poor anon >>16335485 who is forced to go outside? These did not consent to those risks.

>>16335692
In this case it's relevant because their mental state reinforces their philosophy. AN wouldn't exist without depressed individuals. You disliking it doesn't make it go away.

>>16335709
At least it's keeping them from killing themselves. If you think about it that way I guess AN isn't so bad.

>>16335700
You can't face life if you minimize pain. That's running away. (No, I'm not saying maximize it either).
> I just won't force another one to live.
You view it as forcing, but it doesn't have to be that way. Don't project your views of life onto others. I don't feel I was forced by my parents to live.

Suicide and euthanasia should be human rights

>>16335692
That's what happened through this entire thread. Even though all antinatalist arguments here presented were much more reasonable than "life is good desu" "stop being a loser lol" "pain is good tho"

>>16335683
I don't have the right to "allow" anything to anyone nor I would want it. I don't all commit those actions because they are wrong to me. Others do as they please.

>>16335711
It is bad because they drag one another down into this depressing philosophy and make it self-reinforce.

>>16335717
>can only register arguments as strawmen
Can't say I'm surprised by antinatalists thinking like children

>>16335698
"Growing as a person" for what purpose exactly, my nigger? You'll be dead eventually. It will amount to nothing but more suffering. Just pray your passing won't be very painful or gruesome.

>>16335717
It's becaused AN are depressed and can't argue rationally. Their mental process is hijacked. That's why this irrational philosophy only appeals to mentally ill people.

>>16335719
How self centered and lacking in empathy can you be to not care that others create so much suffering around you? AN is such a lazy philosophy jesus christ.

>>16335698
Every action one takes is for his own interest.

>>16335728
For achieving things in life? I know it's hard to imagine when you're this depressed but life can actually have worth and meaning if you work at it. Man I'd hate to view life through your eyes.

>>16335703
I very much doubt they were held at gun point to go outside. Besides, again, we're talking about living people in this example.

>>16335734
No it's not. Some people actually do things for higher goals than themselves. You probably also think life is inherently materialist and meaningless?

>>16335650
>>16335703
And I cannot quite see the real difference if they are consenting to the risk anyways, since you’re only bringing them a risk of suffering, this is true if you bring anyone outside, like they forced that poor anon. Do you not do anything like this either?

>>16335731
This bit is about me, there are ANs who would prevent others from procreating. I do not associate myself with them.

>>16335744
The children though? They were probably forced outside and could do nothing about it. And why does it have to be by gun anyways. Children applies here >>16335755 too.

>>16335762
If you don't force your children outside by gunpoint every day it means they consented. Even though they didn't consent to being alive.

>>16335739
It may happen to you someday. For now you're just coping, of course. If you had accomplished anything in your own life you wouldn't waste hours on useless debates in 4chan, so you're not fooling anyone.

>>16335748
Those higher goals are what they want. Not sure what you're trying to imply with the other questions but I do think one has to give life its own meaning.

>>16335767
First of all, what about children too young, who are in a stroller? Also, most children do not understand the risks and cannot therefore consent. Or even, what about someone who were actually forced outside by gunpoint?

>>16335768
I've already been there on the other side, anon, I know what I'm talking about.
> If you had accomplished anything in your own life you wouldn't waste hours on useless debates in 4chan, so you're not fooling anyone.
You have a very narrow view of "accomplishing something" if you think that.

>>16335775
That's stupid because you can get raped and beaten on the next corner, or see that happen to your daughter, your girlfriend or your mother. What goal is there to accomplish in such pain? This is a world of disease, of rejection, of frailty. Striving through pain is the greatest of all copes, because 100% of the time will die without fulfilling that you think is your destiny.

>>16335775
>Those higher goals are what they want.
How do you know this? Are parents who sacrifice themselves to save their children doing it because they're selfish? Are people who devote themselves to God selfish? Bold assumptions that you won't be able to verify.
>Not sure what you're trying to imply with the other questions but I do think one has to give life its own meaning.
You answered my question. You think everyone lives life by the same standards you do. Hint: they don't. Some people find inherent meaning in life.

>>16335778
We commonly held parents responsible in such cases. If someone is being forced to take the risk and they get run over I'm sorry for them but it's not my fault, I didn't force them (we're assuming I'm driving safely here).

>>16335791
Yes, because they are all larps. Sacrificing your life for your unconsenting-birthed child is just instinct. Devoting your life to an invisible daddy in the sky that no one has ever seen is a mental disease. Unless you're doing that to get some choir boy booty, in that case it's justified.

>>16335790
The moments where you are in the most pain are not the penultimate moments of your life more than anything else is. Viewing it as some "destiny" to be achieved is so materialist. If you have dedicated yourself to a way of life or a greater idea you are already achieving it. The process is important not some "result" or "reward". You wouldn't understand this though

>>16335797
You accepted the risk you could harm another person by driving, so yes it is your fault.

>>16335791
>How do you know this? Are parents who sacrifice themselves to save their children doing it because they're selfish? Are people who devote themselves to God selfish? Bold assumptions that you won't be able to verify.
But of course. Anything we do is ultimately for our own pleasure, to think otherwise is just hiding from something you find ugly.

>>16335804
Certified retard. You lack empathy and cannot imagine that people would commit selfess acts, and that's why you're antinatalist. Unironically read more.

>>16335819
You're right that people's actions can always be viewed as selfish, but you're wrong that they are done for "pleasure".

>>16335806
This whole idea of "way of life" and "greater ideal" is a shitty self-help book cope, anon. I doubt you actually believe in any of this crap.

But with one thing I agree. I would definitely be much happier if I were able to tell myself these lies and use them to propel me forward. Unfortunately, there is no forward. We are condemned.

>>16335819
> Anything we do is ultimately for our own pleasure
No, that's how you live your life. Stop projecting your insecurities onto the rest of the world.
>to think otherwise is just hiding from something you find ugly.
Oh the irony, it hurts.

>>16335830
It's as much of a cope and a lie as antinatalism is.

>>16335830
> "greater ideal" is a shitty self-help book cope
Is what all materialists say because they can't imagine anything else than their mundane depressing existence.

>>16335824
Antinatalism can be viewed as a selfless position though. You are sacrificing the satisfaction that parenthood brings for the sake of reducing suffering.

>>16335844
>the satisfaction that parenthood brings
lol

>>16335817
If I'm driving on my way and someone running from a killer jump under my car out of nowhere it's not my fault. Pain is part of this world, it's inevitable. Hence why I won't expose someone else to it (in the sense he'll find pain outweights pleasure, not any pain at all).

>>16335797
Sure, but they still didn’t consent to a suffering that would not happen if you did not drive that day. A parent could bring their child up in such a way that they did not themselves cause the child the suffering, even though they brought them the risk, just like how you brought them the risk by going out to drive, even if it’s not your fault.
Just something irrelevant, but is it immoral then for parents to take a walk with their children in a stroller?

>>16335824
Dedicating your life to things that make you feel good about yourself is far from selfless, anon. That includes religion, charity, parading your overgrown zygotes around. It baffles me you lack basic knowledge about human behavior.

>>16335844
There is nothing noble or selfless about not engaging in an act, especially when that act is extremely easy to not engage in. It's the bare minimum you can do when following AN morality

>>16335844
No, it's selfish because they're unwilling to deal with the potential consequences of their actions.

>>16335831
>Stop projecting your insecurities onto the rest of the world.
Or maybe you could stop pretending everything you do isn't for your own interest.

>>16335844
Not murdering people can be viewed as a selfless position. You are sacrificing the satisfaction that murder brings for the sake of reducing suffering.

>>16335829
All "selfless" acts are ultimately done because said person will get some benefir out of it. Either to show others how good they are, or to show a hypothetical deity, or just to feel peaceful and lie to themselves that they are necessary. To become absolved of their guilt and wrongdoings. There is no selfless act.

>>16335854
If you do religion or charity because it makes you feel good about yourself then you're doing it ass backwards. That makes it inherently selfish, not selfless. Shit tier take anon.

>>16335837
Antinatalism is the natural moral conclusion one can reach once he observes the world with uncovered eyes.

>>16335868
>Or maybe you could stop pretending everything you do isn't for your own interest.
Or maybe you could accept that your view isn't universal and not everyone does stuff out of their own interest. The fact that you can't imagine any other possibilities is worrying but indicative of your depression.

>>16335873
You seem to have wrapped a lot of negativity around "benefit" that is unnecessary, things are neutral as they are. A parent will save their children at the cost of their own life because it matches with their desire for their children to live. There is no need to beautify this act, but there is also not a need to smear a non existent negative slant on it except to justify your own negativity, despite the fact that it is probably causing you more suffering than it does pleasure. People are selfish and yet they are very unskilled at knowing what will satisfy them.

>>16335840
Ah, "imagine". The proper word. One imagines meaning and things greater than oneself, in order not to go mad from the obvious absurdness of life. Delusions, cope, larping.

kys

>>16335882
Your cope is that you believe your position is uniquely observing the truth, and not as biased and colored by your perspective as everyone else who feels the same way as you about entirely different ideas.

>>16335897
*kyses you back*

>>16335895
If that's what you took from that post you're definitely a retard. Imagine as in, hypothetically entertain a thought that's not inherent to your own thought process to see where it leads. Something you're apparently incapable of.

>>16335849
C'mon dude. It's not like people get pregnant and they accept it like warriors going to a battle. They post it on whatever shitty social media they use, they get congratulations and throw parties to reveal the little monster's gender.

But I disagree with >>16335844, because you can still go through the pains and delights of parenthood by adopting and raising someone else's child.

>>16335883
You can't do something that you don't want to do. Are you familiar with animals and how they behave in nature? The only difference is that we tend to rationalize our actions beyond the simple fact they are our desire.

>>16335878
That's how it is.

>>16335910
>he doesn't post "before battle" selfies before going to blow up desert muslims

>>16335910
>They post it on whatever shitty social media they use, they get congratulations and throw parties to reveal the little monster's gender.
Yes because how people view children and parentage now is exactly like it has always been throughout history. (Hint: it's not.)
>you can still go through the pains and delights of parenthood by adopting and raising someone else's child.
Not the same experience.

>>16335913
If I put a gun to your head and ask you to give me your wallet and you do, it's because you really wanted to give me your wallet.

>>16335894
I agree that it's not necessarily positive or negative. It's just not selfless, because there is always an objective to be reached and that will, somehow, have justification. Only the truly insane, the people at mad asylums would be able to honestly act selflessly, because they act without a goal in mind.

>>16335913
Christ anon go read more please. How are you able to make these retarded takes?
>You can't do something that you don't want to do
I don't want to reply to this shitty bait but I'm still doing it.
>Are you familiar with animals and how they behave in nature?
Yes, more so than yourself probably.
>The only difference is that we tend to rationalize our actions beyond the simple fact they are our desire.
No, incorrect. Our reasoning can actually override our instincts in many instances.

>>16335914
You're right, it's a shit tier take.

>>16335901
To cope literally means to find moral reasons to stand an undesirable situation. I am an antinatalist because I see how coping is useless in regards to a world where death and suffering are the norm. I'm not lying to myself to feel good about this reality.

Sure, my pessimistic lenses will enforce my views. But once you admit death and suffering are real and guaranteed to any being brought forth to existence, any justification you may find to still do it, that would be coping.

>>16335925
selfless =/= without a goal. Selfless means doing something while disregarding yourself in the outcome.

>>16335922
Yes. I could've tried my luck if I had wanted.

>>16335935
>Sure, my pessimistic lenses will enforce my views.
Once you've overcome your depression and re-read this post you'll see how far removed from reality it really is. You think you're being realistic and objective while you're actually being pessimistic and viewing everything in the worst case scenario. Trust me, I've been there.

>>16335936
You can be selfless in the sense of disregarding your literal well-being but you can't be selfless in the sense of disregarding what you want or value on some level.

>>16335942
If you want something of which the outcome is to the detriment if your own wellbeing, that's selfless.

>>16335583
>No AN ever said it
It's the foundation for AN thought. They posit that life is inherently suffering, therefore you shouldn't reproduce. Therefore, suicide is the logical conclusion because you'll be reducing the amount of suffering and makes it certain you won't have children.

>>16335935
You're lying to yourself to feel good though. You feel good about thinking you are "not delusional" and have access to a truth that others lack. This is your cope and how you comfort yourself from your pessimism. The irony is that it is a delusion, that you do not know any truths that others don't. There is no such thing as a non-deluded human.

>>16335940
How do you know that you ''have been there''? Maybe your depression is not even 1/100 of his depression

>>16335949
But what you desire doesn't necessarily benefit others just because it harms you. Wanting to blow up the world because you think it's no good is selfless from this perspective.

>>16335919
>Yes because how people view children and parentage now is exactly like it has always been throughout history. (Hint: it's not.)
I don't have enough data to agree with you or not, but that's irrelevant for my point, since I was responding anon's sarcastic laughter to other anon's claim that being an antinatalist today is a selfless stance.

>Not the same experience.
So what? No two experiences are the same. Why would it not be the same? Because it's not muh genes, muh lineage?

>>16335953
All depression is inherently the same. The intensity and nuances may vary, but not the overall patterns. Anon's though pattern is classic depression though.

>>16335949
>detriment if your own wellbeing
There's no detriment if I get fulfilled by that action.

>>16335960
>Because it's not muh genes, muh lineage?
Yes. That does make a difference because adopted children don't bond in the same way to adoptive parents as regular children-parents relations. I don't know how that's hard to understand. Plus you don't go through the actual birth.

>>16335907
Are-e you pretty g-girl?

>>16335970
Then it's not to your detriment is it?
>>16335958
You're actually correct. I should have added that part.

>>16335950
In my perspective, once you're an AN you have two choices:
>1. Kill yourself. No harm done.
>2. Advocate for AN in order to prevent more children to come to this world to suffer; help with diminishing the suffering of already existing beings in any ways you can; advocating for suicide

>>16335951
>There is no such thing as a non-deluded human.
With that I agree. My AN views do not bring me any comfort though, it brings me a lot of pain. That's why I created the thread, to see if I could be convinced of opposing arguments. You could claim that being in this painful situation also brings me some twisted kind of comfort, and I would be more inclined to agree. I do not see that as coping, though.

>>16335994
>My AN views do not bring me any comfort though, it brings me a lot of pain.
That's because you're depressed and when you're no longer depressed this philosophy will stop making sense.

>>16335972
That's anedotical, you can't factually prove that. Lots, and I mean LOTS of children have serious issues with their biological families, while many other adopted children get much more love and support from adoptive families because of how they came to be their child. You're talking out of your ass now, unless you actually have data to prove me wrong.

>>16335997
If depression leads to an and an leads to the cessation of suffering, then maybe depression is not that bad

>>16336009
LOL no. This has actually been proven and it's not hard to understand why. Having biological parents is no guarantee for success, but the chances are very much higher than with adoptive parents.
Children and their parents (especially mothers) bond emotionally, and that urge is stronger the younger the child is. That's why many traumas and disorders stem from early childhood and failed emotional bonding. Adoption is a forced severing of that bond.
Now, that doesn't mean adoptive children can't do well, or that adoption is worse than being an orphan, but ON AVERAGE adopted children suffer from more mental disturbances than biological children. Sources are everywhere, but I recently read Goleman who looked at this research, you could check him out.

>>16336014
That would be bad because the only way to grow as a person is to overcome suffering. A cessation of suffering would mean no opportunities to grow. That's why people who avoid/minimize suffering stay childlike in their view of how the world works, they never grow.

>>16335994
Coping is something you do to avoid and rationalize pain, so yes it is coping, even if you don't feel it's working very well for you.

>>16336038
It's only really different for the mother. If the father accepts the child its the same.