/lit/ - Literature

>life is a shonen anime

Neck yourself

>>16523298
why are you speaking gibberish

>>16523290
trivial one liners who somehow think they can btfo an entire line of inquiry can never be taken seriously as a philosophy of true men because of this one cowardly misconception:

The fact that they have the hubris to think their 9th grade thesis is in some respects definite in any way or of any merit.

>>16523437
You're terrible at writing, your sentences make no sense. Try using grammar next time.

>They believe that suffering is inherently a bad thing.
Yes.

Humanity ever so strives to reduce its suffering -- and by suffering, it's mean impermanent contentment.

This does imply that there is something inherently negative with suffering; how one responds to the suffering is either positive or negative, I think is the point you want to get at.

>>16523290
>life sucks, I wish I was never born
>???
>lets enslave more souls in this existence

>>16523691
life is a fucken romp m8 what are u on about?

>>16523691
Personal antinatalism is a good idea for the losers that actually wish they were never born.

>>16523298
Suffering helps you grow as a person, makes you stronger and brings out the best human qualities. Stop being a bugman.


>You want if possible – and there is no madder `if possible' to abolish suffering; and we? – it really does seem that we would rather increase it and make it worse than it has ever been!

>>16523290
I support natalism for European whites and antinatalism for nonwhites living on European lands as a nonwhite. Your race is kind of threatened.
I am personally child free though but not antinatalist.

>>16523757
the greatest minds were antinatalists themselves, do you think that some trailer redneck that has 7 kids is more successful than a childless genius?

>>16523841
>do you think that some trailer redneck that has 7 kids is more successful than a childless genius?
One fulfilled their purpose in life, the other was a genetic dead end. Yes.

>>16523857
>One fulfilled their purpose in life
Friend, this is a comforting truism, I won't argue about that, but you're confusing function with purpose. Living things exist because their ancestors replicated themselves. Over generations, the mechanisms that encourage them to replicate themselves grew stronger, because there is a survival benefit to being motivated to replicate themselves. Presuming that replication is the purpose of life is simple and circular. It is exactly as reasonable to suppose that the life-forms that had no desire to reproduce and thinned out in the past are the ones that "fulfilled their purpose in life" by ceasing the pointless replication of their genetic patterns. Evolution has no "good" and "bad," just "adapted to continue living in this environment" and "less so."

>>16523814
>Suffering helps you grow as a person, makes you stronger and brings out the best human qualities.
It also does the exact opposite, at least as frequently. Suffering turns people into deluded or cowering worms and hateful, twisted monsters. It's neutral at best. Machines don't suffer at all and they can be stronger, more skilled, more diligent, more selfless, less cruel than any human.

>>16523949
Reproduction is the meaning of life. Have sex and impregnate, incel

>>16523841
There is a difference between not having children yourself and believing that it's wrong. A forgotten genius amounted to nothing, and would be pointless without cultural heirs to carry on and remember his work. How many of these greatest minds wished they were never born?

Antinatalism is fundamentally a loser ideology, espoused by those that can't find joy in a world that is full of them.

>>16523841
Most pf the geniuses of the past had children
>b-but Newton and Tesla
Gailei, Descartes, Leibniz, Euler, Gauss. There, now shut up

It is.
Everyone always says "but it will make you better :)", that is only in specific cases.
Of course suffering through physical infirmities, mental disabilities, hunger, disease, thirst, poverty, etc.. does not make you better and often times are not alleviated.
Nor will suffering in the sense of mental anguish and anxieties at the inevitable cessation of phenomenon will make you better.
People who believe suffering is good only believe so in a specific circumstance wherein it leads to a positive change. For example, directing ones anxieties into a desire to get better, to help oneself or others.
But in this case, the positivity is only indirectly caused by suffering, because it is spurned by a desire to avoid suffering.
It is still a bad thing in this case, and the positivity is in the lack of suffering.

>>16524793
Most did not have children.

>>16524943
Most did, you just got meme'd by anti-natalists who always talk about Newton and Tesla.

>>16523841
>>16523841
>the greatest minds were antinatalists

>>16524967
Shut up

>>16523290
Antinatalists are the same ones making I'm a x KHV books for this feel?

Philosophical discussion can go on either /lit/ or /his/, but those discussions of philosophy that take place on /lit/ should be based around specific philosophical works to which posters can refer.

>>16523462
you forgot

>pic not related

>>16524230
No, reproduction is the FUNCTION of life. It's not the MEANING any more than eating is.

>Suffering is a great thing, thats why my suicide will be all the more gruesome.

>>16523841
In his own way yes

>>16523841
Holy fucking seethe
>trailer redneck that has 7 kids
RESSENTIMENT POURING EVERYWHERE

>>16526508
>RESSENTIMENT
Where did you learn French anon?

Anti natalism is strong