/lit/ - Literature

>>17590712
Are you from 9gag?

All you need to understand that antinatalism is correct is watching how much unbridled seething it causes in /lit/ pseuds

>>17590732
The refusal of an antinatalist to commit suicide doesn't make any sense according to their beliefs. They believe life is not worth living. They don't believe in life after death. They believe life is suffering. If you don't believe in life after death, why prolong your suffering? Even if you fear death it makes no sense. You simply prolong your life, and thus your suffering, through your continued existence. Plus the anxiety you experience over death, despite believing after death there is no nothing, further heightens your suffering. Whereas if you killed yourself, which you should if you are an antinatalist, you would end your suffering and your anxiety of death.

So basically anitinatlists believe life is worth living because they cling to it so desperately. This is illustrated in the allegory of the fire.

Go cope some more Cioran cuck.

>>17590744
Having children and enjoying life makes antinatalists seethe.

>>17590744
k, bro

>>17590761
I love how you openly say you depend on strawmanning antinatalism because your argument is wrong. Didn't expect such honesty yet here we are.

>>17590823
No strawman. Antinatalists believe all those things. They don't believe life is worth living. They don't believe in death. And they claim to not commit suicide because they fear death. Their stance is illogical. Clearly they find life worth living, or they don't believe life is suffering.

Keep coping. I also notice how you couldn't even refute the argument or demonstrate how it was a strawman.

>>17590846
*don't believe in life after death

>if you don't want to force this existence on someone else you should kill yourself
What

>>17590744
antinatalism is basically seethe personified as a philosophy. you just need an excuse to hate your parents.

But you see anon, God exists and an afterlife exists and eternal happiness awaits, anti natalists are just really sad people that need to read something like On the Road

>>17590846
that one chinese antinatalist dude actually followed through though and killed himself. he wrote a blog about david benatar's philosophy and it how it necessarily leads to suicide. i mean hes still retarded but at least he followed through

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3184600

>>17590761
>They believe life is not worth living

Wrong, strawman. It's not that life as a whole is not worth living, it's that some lives aren't worth living and you shouldn't be able to gamble with someone else's life

>>17590877
I thought life was suffering, antinatalist? Why haven't you ended yours? Is it because you fear death? But don't you believe that there is nothing after death? So why prolong your suffering? Shouldn't you just get it overwith and avoid the future suffering you experience? Oh but you'll say the act of committing suicide will cause more suffering! But won't your lifelong anxiety over death cause more suffering? I mean why does it matter if there is nothing after death? Why should you keep suffering?

We all know it's because you enjoy life and it's also because you're a toddler throwing a temper tantrum because you aren't immortal, because you aren't desired by women, and because you're a complete failure at life. Go cope some more.

Also shouldn't you be killing newborns? They aren't cognizant enough to be aware of death (and its anxiety which you claim prevents your suicide). They wouldn't even know they are dying, especially if you lethally inject them (human suicide fagguette, you should try it). You would end the newborns lifelone despair and suffering you claim they will experience before they are even aware of life! BUT the suffering to the parents you will say! How can this speck of sand compare to the mound of suffering an adult human accumulates throughout their life, as you claim.

Go be a pussy somewhere else.

I’m an antinatalist. Explain to me why I should want to an hero. I just recognise that life is pointless and I’m not having kids.

>>17590930

I cited this paper unironically for my undergrad.

>>17590846
Your life so far: -100 value
Killing yourself and causing suffering for your loved ones: -1000
Living out your life in a calm manner until death: -200
It's really not that hard. Killing yourself is different from not being born. You ignore this fact because you lost the debate when you earnestly engaged antinatalism

>>17590955
How do CHADtinatalists generate so much seethe, just look at this novel.
Antinatalism is confirmed the punk rock of /lit/. Pushing boundaries while soccer moms seethe.

>>17590934
This is just more seethe over immortality and not being born a "God".

>>17590846
Whats illogical about fearing death? 6 billion years of evolution infused every living being on this planet with fear of death

>>17590974
It's illogical to not commit suicide when you find life suffering, not worth living, not believing in an afterlife. Fear of death means you find life worth living.

>>17590934
Gambling is good when it leads to 99%+ victory rate.

>>17590969
Please, live out your ideals and neck yourself

>>17590969
Damn you couldn't even refute. Your generation alpha brain is so pozzed by tiktok you can't read something longer than a tweet.

>>17590997
>Fear of death means you find life worth living
No it doesn't? Read Last Messiah ffs before coming here making a fool of yourself

>>17590934
see
>>17590930

>Also shouldn't you be killing newborns? They aren't cognizant enough to be aware of death (and its anxiety which you claim prevents your suicide). They wouldn't even know they are dying
What the fuck am I reading?

>>17591006
Your eternal torrent of seethe gives me the will to live.

>>17591012
Yes it does. You cleary enjoy living, otherwise you wouldn't cling to it for all the suffering you claim it causes.

>>17591016
The logical conclusion of antinatalism.

>>17591019
So what you're saying is I have convinced you not to be an anti-natalist. Based

>>17591036
More like the illogical retardation of the illiterate on the topic.

By the way, I don't know why anyone would bother with replying to a thread with an OP that features a basedjak, a strawman and /v/speak.

>>17591038
N-Nani!?

>>17590955
Because I was lucky enough to have a decent life, for now at least, but there is no guarantee that a new life would be that lucky. Making kids is basically taking a gamble with someone else's life.

>>17591021
>>17591036
Humans are not logical machines. 99% of decisions you make in life barely factor any logic whatsoever. You're trying to shame a snake by pointing out that walking upright is clearly a better more of locomotion

>>17590712
The problem with antinatalism is that its not really compassionate as David Benatar presents it. Its actually quite spiteful. Its not meant to end suffering its just a cope for people who are envious of others happiness and want to bring people down to their level. Just pettiness disguised as moralizing

>>17591068
It's literal only goal is to not bring others down to their level though.

>>17591068

This is true but it's still correct.

>>17591058
See
>>17590971

>>17591068
Why do people always refer to Benatar and not Ligotti when talking about antinatalism? Benatar is not an antinatalist, he's utilitarian

>>17591091
the whole point is to project your unhappiness onto others i.e. life is suffering.

>>17591091
No it's only goal is to turn people into sententious moralizing pompous asses who cope with the fact they can't be a God.

>>17590957
No. But my anti-natalism is not of the "life is pointless" sort. I simply think it's immoral to have children, by the traditional biological means. That's al there is to it, really. I still love to live, and I think life's worth it, but having offspring in the usual way? That's what I'm against, because I think it leads to suffering, and I'm leaving myself open to the possibility of siring children in some other way, as of yet unknown to me.

>>17591103
because Ligotti is not a logically rigorous philosopher and his MALGINANTLY USELESS shtick gets laughable after a while

>>17591117
i think this is the better position to take. not to see antinatalism as some categorical imperative but as a personal choice.

>>17590712
The Antinatalist view is that while the absence of people experiencing pain is a good thing, the absence of people experiencing pleasure is morally neutral. From this they infer giving birth to an individual is a moral evil. Their view is not that life itself is necessarily a bad thing - life can be good or bad, pleasant or painful. The argument is that the action of giving birth in particular is a moral evil because the absence of people experiencing pain is something good, but the absence of people experiencing pleasure is neither good or bad.
>>17590969
pretty much this

>>17591142
i think this seriously undervalues pleasure which is what the problem is. and that valuation is completely subjective so it doesnt make sense to make a universal moral prescription on something that can be decided on an individual level

>>17591111
No.
>>17591115
No.
As I said pronatalists cannot engage honestly with the actual claims of antinatalists. These strawmen only show your desperation.

>>17591122
>philosophy
>logically rigorous
Begone stemfaggot

>>17591142
>heh I defined good as zero. what now natalist cucks!
Wow. Makes sense antinatalists have to gerrymander semantics for their viewpoint to be tenable.

>>17591159
It's already been engaged seriously and irrevocable refuted. We're just making fun of you now.

>>17590761
My only complaint about life is that it ends. If it had no end I'd happily have children but I will not create life only for it to be inevitably extinguished.

>>17590712
Antinatalism will be the most significant philosophical theory to come out of the 21st century.

>>17591182
It's been a cope since Ancient Greece. It has only gained traction due to incel communities and the internet.

>>17591176
cope

>>17591182

This but unironically.

-Easy to understand
-High meme potential
-Gives zoomers a way to channel their hatred for life

>>17591180
Life does not end, because the life of the living creature is in the spirit, not in the body. And so the body has a beginning and an end, but the spirit does not have either beginning or end.

>>17591159
i love how your only response now is saying NO like a child would. makes sense since the entire antinatalist subreddit is just children complaining about their parents.

>>17591197
>WHY AM I NOT A GOD
>Nooooo YOU CANT DO THIS TO ME
>IT IS NOT FAIR

>>17591176
this

>>17591164
>stemfaggot

just because I'm employed doesn't make me wrong

>>17591210
>make false assertion
>REEE why did you reject my assertion
Okay buddy. I take you very seriously.

>have kid
>he gets some incurable disease, ends up in some accident, has a terrible life, etc.
Eh nothing personal kid, at least you had the chance to experience things

>since I reject the concept of meaning, the only thing that could possibly alleviate the inevitable suffering in life must be pleasure
>oops, looks like pleasure doesn't negate the fact that we die at the end and bad stuff happens
>therefore existence itself must be bad, because let's reduce existence to a cynical and near-sighted cost-benefit analysis of suffering versus pleasure
>oh btw I'm morally superior to you because I don't bring children into this wretched world
>even though I myself still stick around, despite claiming that life is not worth living and non-existence is literally just moments away at any time
>no never mind that, the world is still really bad
>I just don't kill myself because it would make other people feel bad or some bullshit like that
>even though they could just kill themselves as well to alleviate that suffering, which is essentially what I've been arguing for all along
>NOOO YOU CAN'T CLAIM THE LOGICAL CONCLUSION TO MY PHILOSOPHY IS SUICIDE
>YOU OBVIOUSLY JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND ANTINATALISM NOOOOO

It really is the biggest loser philosophy ever. Too weak-willed to make something of life, too cowardly to just end it.

i remember some faggot posted one of these antinatalists threads and then when people refuted him he just broke down halfway and admitted to being a meth and heroin addict and saying he hated his life and then just started throwing tantrums without actually contributing anything lol. sad shit.

>>17591247
Is this the new "if you're a hedonist why are you not a heroin addict"?
It's really just an admission of defeat.

>>17591236
how is it false? it explains the whole logic behind the movement. you just choose not to accept it because you need a reason to hate your parents.

>>17591261
and if you want empirical evidence of the psychology behind the movement take one look at the subreddit. its literally just projection personified.

>>17591258
>if you're a hedonist why are you not a heroin addict
That would actually be a valid question if heroin addiction wasn't so fucking miserable. People generally don't use heroin to seek pleasure, but to numb some sort of pain they haven't learned to cope with.

>>17591247
What is the meaning of life?

>>17591297
to get pussy which antinatalists cant do. thus the cope and seethe

>be me
>birth defects make it impossible for me to ever have a normal life
>people still seethe when I post about antinatalism online

>>17591304
>birth defects

ah i see. it all makes sense now. ive just been arguing with a literal retard.

>>17591304
because you're still wrong lol. You can just kill yourself. Super easy. Go do it. Instead, you want to prevent the majority of us who have happy lives from ever being born. You're selfish, and the world has no place for selfish people who are glad they were born but lie and say they're angry. Just kill yourself if you actually didn't want to be born. It's easy. Do it.

>>17591321
I recommend you take your meds, friend.

>>17591321
encouraging them to kill themselves is just stooping to their level though. they'll just use it against you and say DUUUHHH LOOK HOW MEAN THEY AREEEE. antinatalists are adults stuck in an adolescents worldview. this article explains the puerility a bit better

http://www.samuelabelow.com/blog/2017/12/15/anti-natalism

>WHAT DO YOU MEAN I'M MORALLY IN THE WRONG TO GET MYSELF A TINY SLAVE WHO MUST OBEY ME FOR THE MINIMUM OF 18 YEARS, STUDY AND THEN WORK AND LEAD A SOULLESS LIFE WITHOUT MEANING OR PURPOSE FOR MY BENEFIT SO I HAVE A SOURCE OF COMFORT IN MY LATER YEARS HAHA YOU'RE DUMB IF HE DOESN'T LIKE IT HE CAN ALWAYS JUST GO THROUGH THE EXCRUCIATING EXISTENTIAL NIGHTMARE THAT IS SUICIDE LMAO THAT EASY

>>17591352
Do you have anything against the anti-natalists position, except for strawman arguments?

>>17591343
why? I'm not the one who is mad about a problem with an easy solution they refuse to take
>>17591352
I'm not stooping to their level. If you want to not exist, that's fine. But that doesn't justify being anti-natalist. Anti-natalists don't want happy people to exist because they don't want to exist -- which is illogical, because they can kill themselves if they want, but "potential" happy people who never existed can't wish themselves into existence. It's a selfish mindset that says, "I'm unhappy, so you can't be happy!"

>>17591370
i dont think you understand what im saying or maybe you just dont want to read the link. either way keep coping

>>17591369
You got it backwords. The child isn't the slave. You're the slave to the child.

>>17591377
>Keeps on strawmanning

>>17591370
you keep saying straw manning when I've provided you with evidence lol. the denial is insane mang.

>>17590712
Literature

>>17591388
Well, I haven't asked for any "evidence" to begin with.

>>17591386
read. the. link.

>>17591394
so you just want to base it purely on reason? reason alone isnt enough to end the world. you need to see if you're reasoning is valid from a psychological perspective (is life suffering for everyone or only me?) reason goes hand in hand with empiricism one cannot function without the other

>>17591396

>>17591381
>YOU GOT IT WRONG OKAY IM THE SLAVE TO A CHILD BECAUSE I HAVE TO DEDICATE A TINY AMOUNT OF MY ATTENTION AND FINANCES TO FEED IT AND KEEP IT HEALTHY ALTHROUGH IF THE CHILD DISPLAYS ANY UNHEALTHY, ANTISOCIAL, OR SUICIDAL TENDENCIES AND THREATENS TO ESCAPE MY LEASH I WILL GLADLY TAKE HIM TO A DOCTOR AND HOOK HIM UP ON A BUNCH OF MIND-ALTERING DRUGS THAT WILL PACIFY HIS WILL AND DESTROY THE NATURAL REBELLION AGAINST LIFE WITHIN EVERY SENTIENT BEING

>>17591415
so how can you say im strawmanning when you're in literal denial? its no longer strawmanning if it actually applies to a person. if I was debating a schizophrenic person and their fundamental beliefs were altered by a mental disorder it would not be strawmanning to call them out for having schizophrenia.

>>17591242
Yep. At least he got to live.
Now watch the seethe roll in.

>>17591414
For starters, there is a difference between the Ego, and the Self. While the Ego is imagined, the Self is real. And from this perspective, there is no difference between the suffering of Everyone, and the suffering of Me. My anti-natalism is based on the reduction of suffering, which is why I advocate against the siring of offspring in the traditional, biological sense that most of us are familiar with, and which we are most commonly referring to when we are talking about producing heirs, or "having kids". That being said, I'm not against "Life", in the true and original meaning of the word, nor am I against the having of pleasure, rather I believe that there are different forms of pleasure, and I also believe that there are certain things in this world that masquerade themselves as a form of pleasure in order to fool people into evil and suffering, and therefore I am against many of the things that many of us deem a form of "pleasure" but which I personlly believe are rather cleverly concealed traps.

>>17591415
idk if its you or the other antinatalists but Ive sensed a patter with you guys. call it strawmanning or whatever but theres something severely cultish about you guys. like whenever anyone posts any link to an actual refutation none of the antinatalists even acknowledge it. you've made yourselves unfalsifiable. and then you just resort to the whole "straw man" again. its rather tiresome.

Pessimism is a primitive and a Greek philosophy

>"You, most blessed and happiest among humans, may well consider those blessed and happiest who have departed this life before you, and thus you may consider it unlawful, indeed blasphemous, to speak anything ill or false of them, since they now have been transformed into a better and more refined nature. This thought is indeed so old that the one who first uttered it is no longer known; it has been passed down to us from eternity, and hence doubtless it is true. Moreover, you know what is so often said and passes for a trite expression. What is that, he asked? He answered: It is best not to be born at all; and next to that, it is better to die than to live; and this is confirmed even by divine testimony. Pertinently to this they say that Midas, after hunting, asked his captive Silenus somewhat urgently, what was the most desirable thing among humankind. At first he could offer no response, and was obstinately silent. At length, when Midas would not stop plaguing him, he erupted with these words, though very unwillingly: 'you, seed of an evil genius and precarious offspring of hard fortune, whose life is but for a day, why do you compel me to tell you those things of which it is better you should remain ignorant? For he lives with the least worry who knows not his misfortune; but for humans, the best for them is not to be born at all, not to partake of nature's excellence; not to be is best, for both sexes. This should be our choice, if choice we have; and the next to this is, when we are born, to die as soon as we can.' It is plain therefore, that he declared the condition of the dead to be better than that of the living."

– Aristotle, Eudemus (354 BCE)

>>17591301
>to get pussy
And why is it that?

>>17591428
Strawmanning is when you construct your opponents argument, instead of letting him construct it for himself, so that you can proceed to attack the newly built fake argument, which is what I believe you were doing

>>17591453
I might not be who you think I am, seeing as there are many people in this thread, but I have no interest in reading your link. So please don' take it as an insult, for I am tired of reading today and have to go and get something to eat now, and I am in no mood to read articles, you must forgive me.

>>17591445
so you're view of society is based on pseudoscience. psychoanalysis and its ideas of the self and the ego have been largely discredited if you bothered to read any contemporary psychology. which would actually help you a lot more than antinatalism ever would.

I’m not reading all you guys’ novels but whoever posted the first wojak conceded they argument. Therefore, antinatalists won this time.

>>17591453
cognitive dissonance
deep down they know the logical conclusion to their philosophy is not pretty, so they essentially put their fingers in their ears and go LALALALALALALALALA

>>17591466
yes but i'm not strawmanning im steelmanning. im trying to assess the fundamentals of your theory and why they necessarily have a psychological basis. and yea its ok you dont have to read it. im pretty tired too lol

>>17591468
I scoff at your "contemporary psychology". My education comes from ancient traditional sources such as the Vedas and the Bible

>>17591457
to put your dick in it. do i really have to explain everything?

>Among the least praiseworthy incentives to reproduce are parents’ pipe dreams of posterity - that egoistic compulsion to send emissaries
into the future who will certify that their makers once lived and still live on, if only in photographs and home movies. Vying for an even less praiseworthy incentive to reproduce is the sometimes irresistible prospect of taking pride in one’s children as consumer goods, trinkets or tie-clips, personal accessories that may be shown off around town. But primary among the pressures to propagate is this: To become formally integrated into a society, one must offer it a blood sacrifice. As David Benatar has alleged in Better Never to Have Been, all procreators have red hands, morally and ethically speaking. Naturally, the average set of parents is able to conceive of less reprehensible, but still not praiseworthy, incentives for reproduction. Among these are the urgency to beat the biological clock or abandon all hope for the legendary enjoyments of the parental role; the desire to solidify a spousal relationship; the wish to please one’s own parents with grandchildren; the need of an insurance policy that one’s offspring will probably feel obligated to pay off once their begetters are in their dotage; the quelling of a sense of guilt or selfishness for not having done their duty as human beings; and the squelching of that pathos which is associated with the childless. Such are some of the non-praiseworthy incentives of those who would fertilize the future. And they are all pressures of one kind or another. These pressures build up in people throughout their lifetimes and cry to be released, just as our bowels cry to be released to avoid the discomfort of a fecal build-up. And who, if they could help it, wants the discomfort of a fecal build-up? So we make bowel movements to relieve this pressure. Similarly, quite a few people make gardens because they cannot withstand the pressure of not making a garden. Others commit murder because they cannot withstand the pressure building up within them to kill someone, either a person known to them or a passing stranger. And so on. Our whole lives consist of pressures to make metaphorical as well as actual bowel movements. Releasing these pressures can have greater or lesser consequences in the scheme of our lives. But they are all bowel-movement pressures of some kind. At a certain age, children are praised for making a bowel movement in the approved manner. Later on, the praise of others dies down for this achievement and our bowel movements become our own business, although we may continue to praise ourselves for them. Yet pressures go on influencing our lives, including pressures to have some opinions rather than others, and the proper release of these essentially bowel-movement pressures may once more come up for praise, congratulations, and huzzahs of all kinds

>>17591417
>DESTROY THE NATURAL REBELLION AGAINST LIFE WITHIN EVERY SENTIENT BEING
Holy retard

ANTI-NATALISTS: why don't you hire a hitman to kill you? You won't know when your death comes, and you won't have to deal with the anxiety of suicide.

>>17590974
6 billion years?

>>17590761
Good effort bro. You cant argue with them though. Its like trying to cure a brick wall of depression. They're inanimate levels of retarded. Thankfully the problem will take care of itself eventually.

>>17591875

Actually a pretty good idea I'll think about it.

>>17591875
But, you will know it's coming since you did the hiring. What are you talking about you dumb retard?

Instead, you'd be plagued by the dread of when it will come, since you know it is. See the movie Bullworth.