/lit/ - Literature

The only antinatalist that I respect is that Korean guy who actually applied his philosophy and an heroed

>>16465120
If living is suffering why haven't you killed yourself yet?

>>16465120
It's ungodly and shows lack of virtue. It's the next step in modernity leaving behind the Good. Abortion and trannies weren't enough, we must now actively be against all childbirths.

It's gnosticism without mysticism. So not only is it idiotic, it's boring.

>>16465167
Because that won't bring antinatalism to the public

>>16465120
Because these tards unironically think life is worthwhile when all they do is shitpost on a chinese cartoon forum.

>>16465120
Have fun reincarnating as a discord tranny

>>16465120
>physicalist Gnosticism
>Gnosticism without the part of Gnosticism that makes it work
It’s retarded

>>16465225
That's not what philosophy is about. It's about describing how life works. Therefore if you believe antinatalism is a philosophy and that you believe it is true, you should without a doubt do the world the favor of leaving it behind. After all if you believe antinatalism, your life is only going to get worse and happiness is impossible.

>>16465225
The best way to convince other people is displays of virtue.
So kys.

>>16465120
Antinatalists aren't wrong in assuming that being born inflicts suffering upon the individual, because life itself contains suffery and tragedy.

The necessity of killing yourself doesn't automatically follow, though. Especially because antinatalists reject the afterlife as well, robbing themselves of any hope of ever being happy.

Also, modern day antinatalists are insufferable losers. Projection their shit life unto others by preventing them for having children.

>>16465254
If you can't spread your philosophy it would be a failure

>>16465258
Arguments work as well.

>>16465278
If your philosophy isn't inherent, it is patently false.

>>16465182
>>16465223
>>16465252
This. It's like the threw out the right part of Gnosticism and kept the wrong one

>>16465120
They are afraid fo the truth. Antinatalism is humanity collectively committing suicide, which is the only logical reaction to life.

>>16465120
The final development of Geist. It is just sad

>>16465120
It would justify mass murder if antinatalists were vertebrates

>>16465225
what about writing a manifesto and then blowing up a maternity ward and then writing a book in jail

because it makes them seethe
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T JUST ADVOCATE HECKIN EXTINCTIONARINO!!!!! THINK OF THE HECKIN PROGRESS AND BABARINOS!

>>16465388
That wouldn’t do it either ;-;
Gosh, these fucking breeders just don’t understand!

>>16465313
React, then.

>>16465388
That's dumb.

>>16465313
Why do you want the humanity to go with you?
Just do it yourself and leave us happy folk alone.

>>16465394
>NOOOOOO I'M DEPRESSED YOU CAN'T BE HAPPYYYYYY YOU SHOULD ALL WANT TO DIE AS MUCH AS MEEEEEE

>>16465401
It worked for Ted.

>>16465401
>>16465397
why?

>>16465404
You are not happy if I am not. Fuck off, breeder

>>16465425
what if i'm a sadist

>>16465430
No such thing.

>>16465421
You have to increase humanity’s minimum IQ to what would be 130 nowadays before filthy breeders would understand.

>>16465452
blow up all countries excluding israel, south korea, and japan then?

>>16465273
>Also, modern day antinatalists are insufferable losers.
I bet you can't name even 1 (one) anti-natalist writer/thinker

>>16465120
Because its the ultimate cope destroyer.

>>16465576
this proves his point, mr. retard

>>16465120
I don’t care if they individually follow that. But forcing it upon others is whole another issue

>>16465596
You can google it if that makes it easier for you.

>>16465612
Why would I, mr. retard?

>>16465629
Anti-natalist is not anti-sex it’s anti-birth. If you use some form of birth control or had abortions you’re pretty much a light anti-natalism without even realizing it.

>>16465313
>logical
mmmm exquisite

>>16465225
Yes it does.

>>16465667
See >>16465661

>>16465661
I think I would find raising children fulfilling, why should I not pursue this?

>>16465244
>discord trannies are the souls of the fallen soldiers in World Wars
That sucks.

>>16465678
Because you are an awful parent who will set your child up for failure and suffering all because you think being a parent is fulfilling (which it is not)

>>16465692
>you think being a parent is fulfilling (which it is not)
prove that this is true for me personally

>>16465702
Ask your parents

>>16465678
I just wanted to make it clear it’s not an anti-sex philosophy. It’s only anti-pregnancy. It would approve of mass scale abortions

>>16465708
Are you claiming that I am metaphysically equivalent to my parents?

>>16465709
Why would you think I thought that and why would you think I care either way (though I think abortion post consciousness is immoral)

>>16465677
why should I "see" that post?
Why do you think there is a "logical" "reaction" to "life"?
Pretty trite to point out that contraception is light anti-natalism. Obvious differences in baggage, is which is what I was posting about re
>logical

>>16465120
Insincerity. If you don't practice your own philosophy, it means it's worthless.
If antinatalists presume life to be meaningless suffering, they should off themselves. They can do so after writing a treatise on why they did it, no problem, so long as their action follows their words.

Otherwise it is all 'woe is me' attention whoring.

>>16465747
Birth control is anti-nature and anti-life, roastie

>>16465754
>never read anti-natalist literature
It's so easy to spot the tards who think they are smart by not engaging with the material at all.

>>16465758
>Birth control is anti-nature and anti-life
no shit
What your adolescent, cretinous mind doesn't grasp logical possibility =/= existence but is abstraction. And what's terrible about it in your case is that you treat a logical category as more than real. This is a sort of fiction. Fictions like this resemble definitions, but fortunately we all know that what is denoted by a definition isn't the real thing.
I'm was loling at your method.

>>16465814
nice shitpost

>if you're antinatalist you have to kill yourself

Why? All antinatalist means is stopping reproduction, stopping new existence. You could love living and love life and be antinatalist. Just show how much of psueds this board is that kill yourself is even an arguement.

I'm going to shill my antinatalism take again. Feel free to critique:

So far as I can tell there are two possibilities: Either God exists or He does not.

>God exists
This means there is a heaven and a hell. Choosing to create a life is choosing to bring another soul (without their consent) into the game of either going to heaven (eternal pleasure) or going to hell (eternal torment). Instead of allowing that soul to remain in non-existence, you are forcing it into a game with the highest stakes imaginable. To illustrate this (like a retard) consider the following scenario:
>There is a magical crosswalk where, should you successfully cross to the other side, you will be given $1,000,000,000. However, there is an UNKNOWN chance that a car will come whipping by and hit you causing you to die in the most painful way possible. Would you consider it to be moral to FORCE someone else (without their consent) to cross this magical sidewalk instead of allowing them to remain on one side (where they won't ever get the money but they also won't be hit by the car)? This is my (retarded) metaphor for creating life. Is it moral to "bring someone off the bench" (the bench of non-existence) into the game of going to hell or going to heaven?
(1/2)

>>16465820

>>16465832
>God does not exist
Should you choose to bring life into the world in this scenario, you would be doing so for wholly selfish reasons. This life is full of torment and suffering (or at the very least monotony) for the vast majority of human beings, yet you must knowingly ignore this reality if you choose to have children. To illustrate this, consider the following:
>In this arena of a Godless existence animals must consume to survive. Just as the zebra consumes grass the lion consumes zebras. The suffering experienced by the zebra as it is viciously eaten alive is far more severe than the enjoyment experienced by the lion eating his most recent meal. You might think "well humans are like lions, so this isn't so bad" but you should consider the nature of the lion's consumption. Eating zebras is just the lion's way of avoiding the pain of starvation. Assuming it doesn't die in through some terrible disease or accident, the lion will spend its entire existence running away from the pain of death and starvation until it can't run anymore. Its Godless existence can be summed up to a frantic flight away from suffering that it can NEVER avoid. It's reason for existing? Father and mother lion just kind of felt like it. (Retard zebra-lion analogy inspired by Ligotti).
As God does not exist and you are able to function beyond your animalistic drive to breed (to some degree), you are creating a vessel to be filled with all the pain and torment of this world "because you feel like it". Is this not morally reprehensible?
(2/2)

>>16465225
You gotta live it bro

oh my god not my heckin breederinoing

>>16465167
Because it's not about about the existence, it's about the non existence. Why will they kill themselves ? They're here, the choice was made for them. It's about the choice.

>>16465828
>You could love living and love life and be antinatalist
Why? Would you be living all the good things in life away from others?

>>16465882
>away from others
How could you be depriving anyone of anything if they don't exist? How hard is this to understand

>>16465882
Absurd. There is no others. They do not exist. There's no being in the void.

>>16465881
If life is not worth living why are you living? Or is it just worse to die than to not have been

>>16465928
READ THE POST IT ALREADY ANSWERS YOUR DUMBASS QUESTION

>>16465933
Your post says that the choice for them to live was made by someone else, but why can't they then chose to die, to become non-existent

>>16465928
That is not the point. Your argument is about life to death. Antinatalism is about nothing to life. That life is worth living or not for the living is in the end, irrelevant to the question of necessity.

>>16465961
Well they can if they want. How is it relevant to the question of procreation ?

>>16465982
So your making a choice for someone else that you wouldn't make yourself?

>>16465998
If even most antinatalists choose existence over non-existence why would we think people to be born won't feel the same way?

>>16465999
What choice is that I'm making for someone ?

>>16466025
their creation

>>16466021
Because there is no "people" to be born ? There is no people before birth.

>>16466029
See>>16466035

>>16466035
we are creating the biological structure that will develop their consciousness, so what's the problem with that?

It's largely pointless and ultimately is an individual decision. No way it will ever be enforced in any meaningful capacity and expecting some big "Wake Up" for every person to come to the same conclusion is idealistic nonsense

>>16466048
Yes, you decide to impose life, and death.

>>16466097
on who?

>>16466061
It is really not ultimately an "individual" decision. It is only as a choice.

is there anything more NPC than being a breeder?

>>16466113
>It is really not ultimately an "individual" decision. It is only as a choice.
esl?

>>16466110
The one being which you create the biological structure that will develop his/her consciousness. Which as a conscious being, is not a necessity anymore.

>>16466121
The choice to procreate only is an individual decision. The act to procreate is not an individual decision.

>>16465120
as an antinatalist, moral/existential/epistemological nihilist, athiest, omnicidal, anti-sentience, anti-emotion, egoist everyone thinks im insane despite me being right.
its everywhere. everyone is deluded and working for their genetic code. everyone has arbitrary beliefs.
i am.. ANGERY.

>>16465916
>>16465890
You're removing potential. Why?

>>16466188
YOU are nothing

>>16466147
>The act to procreate is not an individual decision.
it is the way I do it

>>16465397
>>16465425
>>16465452
>>16466116

does anyone else get sexually aroused by being called a breeder? No? Just me?
AH AHHHH IM BROOOOODING

>>16466247
(00) imagine the smell (00)

>>16465313
>humanity
Yeah, I don't like humanity either, and I'm personally child free. However, you have to realize the argumentation to justify antinatalism is a lot more complex than just saying humanity is prone to madness, which I agree. It's not sufficient in inherently attaching a negative value to birth.

>>16466247
>That tattoo

>>16466263
Yeah, it’s pretty hot.

>>16465120
Because its dumb and leads people into a spiral of depression for no reason

>>16466323
>>16465313
>inherently attaching a negative
attaching an inherent negative*
Anyways, I do sympathize with antinatalists, but I think the argumentation is weak and it's better to just be child-free. It's also less stressful because you stop caring what others do. It's not our problem.
If a child is abducted and tortured by a serial killer, it is most certainly evil, and I'm pretty sure the child would wish he were never born. Granted, we're not responsible for it and shouldn't let it weigh on our conscience because we chose not to have children of our own.
Let the optimists suffer their ill-fates. Not my problem.

>>16466327
huh?

To be fair there is little to be mad about.
From a worldly perspective it is a self correcting problem. From a scholarly perspective they are utilitarian plebs. From a spiritual perspective they cut themselves out of God's grace by their gnosticism.
Still it's funny to tell antinatalists to kill themselves and see their butthurt at how we totally don't understand their positions because they are bound by survival instincts even more than the norm.

>>16466462
it's such a non issue. If life is as bad as the claim then everyone has the same ability to kill themselves. If they don't it's obvious they value living over being dead.

>>16466476
Well, it's a gamble. There are certain things in life that are worse than death. Hopefully, none of us experience such tragedies, but sadly, history is full of them. It's like a golden brick being thrown into one's house. If it hits you, you die, but if you're lucky you get rich. One can't determine whether or not his or her life was worth it until the very end. I can imagine manners of dying that would make me wish I were never born, but again, hopefully that doesn't happen. It's a gamble.

>>16466424
There is a cuck tattoo on her feet.

>>16465881
>"Someone placed this food on my dish that I don't want!"
>"Okay, just go back to the buffet and get what you want"
>"No, the decision is already made for me, I'll just eat this"
?????

>>16466476
Killing someone that's alive is not the same as that person never having existed in the first place.

>>16466714
suicide is not the same as killing someone. Furthermore, you can only decide whether you want to live or not after you're alive. So not allowing someone to make that choice is robbing them of any positive experience they could have as well as any contribution they could make to the lives of every other person.

>>16465120
Every generation there are lots of antinatalists. Thing is that there will always be another part of the population who is content enough to reproduce

>>16465692
I'd literally kill anyone else to stay alive, if life is so bad why am I so happy?

https://voca.ro/1cvpR8UH07CX

*ahem*

>>16465388
Why would you advocate this bro, you might convince one of these retards to do something

>>16466554
hot

>>16465120
basically it makes me feel bad man. sad way to think. just have children responsibly and don't create a shit life for them.

>>16465120
I would be happy to kill every anti-natalidt on earth. Shooting them in the head, curb stomp, gulliotne, drag behind my ford raptor through the streets of whatever shittt liberal city they live in -

Here’s the best part, they would be thanking me as I killed them! Think of suffering I am saving them from! Not only do I do them a favor, I am refuting them one merciful kill at a time.

>>16465765
Not an argument t

>>16465832
Take your analogy and shove it up your ass you faggot liberal bitch

>>16466231
They won’t answer this, antinataliars are cucks.

I figured out my disdain for these scumbags, they are pure Reddit. They are against birth and the reason is becuase unborn children don’t exist yet: translation: they are lazy pencil neck faggits who love their cushy first world life but are to dishonest to admit they like it. Day of the rope when

Because just like overpopulation it’s pushed only in white countries. It’s code for “we need less whites”.

>>16465832
>>16465842
This is the most compelling argument for anti-natalism, but it doesn't really work if you're a consequentialist. The mothers of Jonas Salk, Fred Rogers, Albert Einstein, and Martin Luther King also chose to produce them. The action of producing them was moral, because it produced more good than it caused evil. The parents of Dahmer, Hitler, and Stalin on the other hand were evil for doing so. In other words, whether or not it is moral to produce children is completely contextual.

>>16467783
https://voca.ro/177DGxQJqEwZ

>>16465120
Because it takes all the worst parts of intellectualism and combines them into one cringy package
>Mistaking your own personal feelings for an objective view of the world
>Earnestly believing something patently false
>Mistaking depression for insight
>Misusing analytical philosophy, resulting in the stupidest most incorrect logical proofs
>Curiously reasoning to a point where all problems are unsolvable as to justify not doing anything
>Not even living by your own dumb credo. Becoming an armchair Evangelical to a false god
>Being annoying at parties

>>16466247
What's her name?

There is an awful lot of natalist cope here for such a pathetic website

>>16467963
Sario Okada

>>16468118
Thx mate