/lit/ - Literature

>>21061772
it's cringe. antinatalists should by their own logic kill themselves, but they stick around to annoy everyone with their slave morality instead.

>>21061772
It's doesn't belong here.

>>21061772
worthless, and antinatalists are usually just unhappy and projecting

>>21061781
Great post
Watch when antinatalists crawl out of their holes now and spend the next 50 posts explaining why their unborn children deserve to die but they themselves deserve to live

>>21061772
Don't care about it desu. I love fucking pussies but certainly don't want to father any little shits, that's just my take though. Most girls I'm fucking don't want kids either now that I think about it.

The single ,most worthtless philosophy. If live isn't worth living then kill yourself and shut the fuck up.

Half of this thread will be retards trying to push that antinatalism is suicidal or nihilistic.

>>21061984
They will be correct to do so. Kill yourself.

It’s toxic.
As someone who has been nihilistmaxxing, lifedenialmaxxing, outsidermaxxing, alienationmaxxing, blackpillmaxxing, pessimistmaxxing, deathdrivemaxxing and misanthropymaxxing lately antinatalism seems very convincing right about now. There are days when I wish I had never been born.
The reason I haven’t killed myself is:
1. I have a family I don’t want to hurt
2. I’m too cowardly to go through with it
3. I might be wrong and life might actually be worth living
4. I admit the possibility of hope, there’s still a small chance my life will turn around so killing myself now would be premature

>>21061772
A good way to cuck yourself

>>21061984
Same argument as "so and so doesn't like homosexuality so therefore he wants to fuck men's butts"

>>21062023
it's not the same at all

>>21061885
>>21061781
bots on lit, wow.

>>21062031
>people think i'm retarded so they must be bots!
pathetic

>>21061772
Self-defeating loser philosophy

>>21062035
no, it's beacuse it's literally the same posts in every antinatalist thread.

>>21062030
Sure sounds like it.

>>21062043
because there's nothing else to be said. >>21062048
explain how or kill yourself

>>21062043
I apologize I misread that. Carry on...

>>21061772
Funny how it's only white people being psyopped with this stuff huh

>>21062051
See above. I was reading the thread too fast.

>>21062016
Antinatalism isn't misanthropic or nihilist.

>>21061772
I support it for people I don't like

>>21062072
Homosexual sex isn't gay either, right?

>>21062088
Here's your (You).

>>21062072
I’m not an antinatalist, I barely think about the ethics of giving birth since I’m too focused on my own suffering to pay much mind for unborn children.
I’m just saying that considering the type of thoughts that have been on my mind lately, antinatalism would naturally interest me since I often wish I had never been born.
I already listed the reason for why I don’t kill myself above

>>21061772
>thoughts on antinatalism?
White people in the "depression" stage of the 5 stages of grief over their decline

>>21062132
Just say jews next time

>>21062138
?
Jews won lmao, why would they be depressed? They have an ethnostate with nukes. Jews are unironically the most successful ethnic group alive today.

>>21062140
If you love Jews so much you should try sucking their uncircumcised cocks then

>>21062145
You sound like a Jew.
Jews love to deny their ill-gotten success.
If you see some "anti-semite" sperging about inbreeding and such things - it's a Jew.

>>21062145
I admire Jews greatly. Who wouldn't? Israel is literally the endgame of every person on the right. The Jews have their Israel, instead of seething about it take it as inspiration.

>>21061772
it's kind of amazing how many negative kneejerk reactions that word receives. it's like a bunch of tourists from Instagram getting confronted with some pernicious idea they would never have expected to exist in a million years. every single thread on the topic.

How you gonna convince me to be an antinatalist when you put a gothy cheerleader with big honking titty knockers on the cover?!?!?

>>21061984
Ignore antinatalism threads like I do. It's always full of copeful retards. Visiting this one has been no different. "le kys" is the only "argument" they can come up with.

>>21061772
Why is feminism described as an antinatalist death cult?
I heard it described before but didn't understand the reasoning behind it

>>21061772
I can't take any ethical theory seriously which is not based in a principle which transcends mankind entirely. This includes many more theories than just antinatalism.

>>21061772
>adult coloring book
Peter Pan syndrome makes my skin crawl

>>21062244
Because femenists depise child-rearing, and a child growing up without any parents is what breeds antinatalism
This brings about the destruction of a genetic lineage

>>21061772
Absolutely based cover
Though I don’t care if other people have children or not

>>21061885

Deserving is irrelevant.

>>21061772
first world faggotry, same thing as animalism and veganism. there is no overpopulation problem. i suspect it can be used as a cope by depressed feminists that wont have children

>>21061772
Why do I get the feeling that if I look up people and organizations who spread "antinatalism", they all will turn out to be not native to nations where they spread it, and moreover, it will turn out that they never spread anything like that in places they are affiliated with?

>>21061772
i don't necessarily agree with everything said by a lot of them.
my personal reasons for being against having children is the fact that they could wind up going to hell upon death. it's partially my fault if they do, because i forced their creation. once you exist, that's it, there is no non-existence, you're an existent being for the rest of eternity. that eternity can be good after the hardships of earthly life, or it can be bad. with how hard it is to make it to heaven, it's more likely you're headed for hell. so i will not be complicit in bringing another life into the world just to die.

>>21061772
My biggest issue is with the argument that no one ever consents to be born. The issue with this logic is that there needs to be an agent in the first place, in order for their to be something towards which we could say someone's consent was violated.
How do you violate the consent of a non-entity? It is only once there is an already existent entity that one can even talk about a person's autonomy. Otherwise you're essentially saying nothingness has moral rights.
A second similar argument they make is to say that given the uncertantities of life all life will contain more pain than pleasure, so life creation should be avoided.
In so arguing they are essentially comparing 0 to something. How can you possibly say a state of not-being is better. That makes no sense not-being, not existence, is the absence of any condition. It cannot have the quality better ascribed to it when we only determine better v.s worse through the lens of an already existent being.

Antinatalists at the individual level can be a successful idea if they dedicate their lives to making other lives better, look at the celibate priest classes

>>21062363
>How can you possibly say a state of not-being is better.
Is eternal suffering better than not-being?

>>21062367
priestly celibacy is a myth, most catholic priests are not celibate like they say they are and in fact most of them are psychosexually immature (i.e. they have the mentality of a much younger person related to sexuality because they have been stunted by christcuckery their whole lives in the cases of many, probably why some go after kids) see the work of richard sipe

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Sipe

>Sipe made the metric calculation that 6% of priests are pedophiles, which the investigative team's subsequent research verifies.[9]

Once you read his stuff it's hard not to suspect this is the case among pretty much all religions, turns out this shit was a grift throughout history all over earth, often times with a sexual bent, who would have thought. kind of a spergout i know but /lit/ should not be spreading the priestly celibacy myth, this is supposed to be a board of literature enjoyers and therefore history knowers and church understanders (well, one can aspire...)

>>21062373
It is neither better nor worse. Since not-being isn't anything you cannot ascribe it any kind of quality like "better".
To say non-existence is worse than eternal suffering would also be an illogical statement.

>>21062428
So, if you had to pick, what would choose?

>>21062428
To put it another way you can only compare two states if both are actual states or conditions.
From what vantage point can you say nothingness is better than eternal suffering given that no one can nor ever will be able to experience nothingness. Have you experienced being a non-entity and found it to be better?

>>21062431
A trapped and starving rat devours itself and so permanently ends its hunger... Given the choice between constant pain and the abscense of pain people will choose whatever will end their suffering. That has nothing to do with non-existence being preferable, and everything to do simply with avoiding pain. Just as the rat probably didn't want to end it's existence but simply to escape from the pain. In real life however we aren't experiencing constant suffering. The experience of pain is changing all the time. If given the choice between a overall miserable existence punctuated with happiness v.s nothing, I would always choose existence.

>>21062392
Way to take the point the wrong way.

Do you deny all celibacy?
answer the sacrifice idea

>>21062250
You must have anxiety attacks every time you heard Smooth Criminal on the radio

>>21062483
i don't care about anti-natalism priests are just adulterers, fags and pedos, stop using the term "celibate" to describe them. and don't reply to this post since it'll just derail the thread

>>21062149
>if someone hates gays they must therefore be gay

>>21062158
Read revelations 2:9 and read up about Jews possibly coming from a different God. You might have to read Tertullian to do so but his counterargument holds no water since he practiced heresy himself.

>>21062503
>>if someone hates gays they must therefore be gay
Jews don't actually "hate" themselves, it's all chutzpah and mimicry. But you already know this, Jew.

>>21062514
Uh I was baptised Lutheran. You are really obsessed with me my guy. Ever touched grass before? Its a great feeling. You should try it

>>21062520
>You are really obsessed with me my guy.
It's just three replies if you include this one, my Jew.

The common retort of "why don't you kill yourself then" has no weight; They aren't suicidal, they're an antinatalist. If they kill themselves then they can't spend their life trying to end the human race. They are not bothered that they are alive. They are bothered that EVERYONE ELSE is alive.

There are two types of antinatalist: 17 year olds who have recently read their first thought provoking book and think it is the height of philosophical intellect to hold the antinatalist position, and left wing university professors who for some strange unknowable peculiar baffling perplexing mystifying coincidental reason are doing all they can to promote people not having children in white countries but not Africa or China.

>>21062140
The only jews that breed are Haredi who don't give a shit about the """state"""" of israel

Most people here mistake antinatalism as a philosophy with "reddit antinatalism".

>>21062540
this is a bit of an underrated approach to the issue, a venn diagram of people who publicly spout anti-natalism but are also pro-immigration c*cks is damn near a circle, so it might be useful to ask why that is. i suppose they would argue that it generates le[sic lol] least suffering, but regardless, i definitely will not be joining their sussy little camp. somehow the anti-natalism of these people disappears when certain conditions are met.

>>21062674
>a venn diagram of people who publicly spout anti-natalism but are also pro-immigration c*cks is damn near a circle
You're basing this on what exactly?
>this is a bit of an underrated approach
Strawmanning isn't underrated.

>>21061772
I have no opinion on it.

>>21062684
How strawman

>>21062684
>You're basing this on what exactly?

the fact that normal people don't think like this. it's universally either disenfranchised losers or, more disturbingly, affluent westerners whose privilege depends on the enslavement of others. very sussy wussy for an affluent person to think like this, it's almost like they have an existential hatred for their "lessers" in their own country...

(to clarify, i suspect many of them aren't wholly honest with themselves and do not think that their hatred of proles colors their "anti-natalism" even when it does so it's not like there's some conscious cabal of anti-natalists operating in the upper classes or anything but that's another discussion)

>>21062708
>so it's not like there's some conscious cabal of anti-natalists operating in the upper classes

actually scratch that there definitely are such cabals lol but they're rarer than such a statement might imply

>>21062708
>>21062716
hmmm...

>>21062436
You just need to be tortured properly then you will know that not being is better, a proper torture session will cure you from your intellectualism detached from reality. Faggot.

>>21062760
this, a good 10 minutes on a CIA black site will cure somebody of this illusion.

>>21062474
>given two simple options
>has to invent an entirely different scenario

>>21062016
Of those 4 reasons literally only 2. Is in the slightest bit valid.

If you still care for people sufficiently (ha) then just spend your life helping them. One of the key blackpills is that in game theory terms people don't give a shit about you and if you help them in this manner they'll simply accept it and not reciprocate. If you haven't succumbed (been enlightened—enweightened?) by knowledge about these sorts of universal constraints on altruism you still have some hope, since you might not be capable of grokking them. I recommend Mediations on Moloch, if you want to get a taste for this sort of thing.

I want to KMS too, btw, and lack all reason not to but cowardice. This isn't shameful. If we had a fear of death so slight as to render spontaeneous suicide easy, all would do it. It's the biological imperative away from that, as well as simple facts of Malthusian styled scarcity economics, which prevent us.

>>21062140
This, desu. Makes me super butthurt when you consider how well Anglos (my people) were doing until just a century ago; we thought we had it stitched up!

I don't blame 'em, BTW. It was just a universal process towards multiculturalism that the Jews benefited from and thus perpetuated, as the Anglos did too. It's simply a sad fact of nature that the interest of borders and boundaries—the zest of life for a pattern-seeking animal—are inherently inefficient. Humanity and civilisation is an inefficiency, which will soon be homogeneised out.

>>21062392
Existence is a sexual grift, dunce. Isolating a single human-collective and then noticing that it's full of sexual deviants is the easiest thing in the world. Next you'll be telling me that goldsmiths are often misers—gee, wonder why?

>>21062436
>experience nothingness
How do you "experience" nothingness? It is the absence of experience itself.

Having children is not moral or immoral, without God there is no such thing. Personally I would not have children. I have a number of reasons, but those are nothing more than my personal thoughts and feelings. They aren't normative and cannot be.

>>21062779
you literally just confirmed what i said and then said "it's obvious", which is false, because it's very clearly not obviously to 99%+ of people.

>>21062787
You specified the clergy as if it's unique.

Antinatalism primarily consists of people who can't reproduce because they're unlikeable people trying to take control of their condition like how incels self-proclaim themselves. they think that embracing it is anything more than digging a deeper hole. antinatalism is natural selection.

>>21062800
it is unique, because it is an organization that claims the opposite. priests are not like petit bougies perpetuating moral memes in order to collect wealth and sodomize their secretaries like say, a district manager of a fast food franchise, they are also by definition dedicated to "god" and spend much of their time telling people that having sex before marriage is bad enough to send you to a torture hole forever, while they usually fuck women or sometimes kids (see sipe >>21062392). that's extreme, that's brazen, that's very spicy. much more so than the average predator under capitalism. so priests deserve extra scrutiny, they are part of the vanguard perpetuating these lies.

What do you call an anti-natalist who just believes in anti-natalism for a good 90% of the world's population?

>>21062819
That's eugenics, not anti-natalism.

>>21062815
also don't just blame this shit on the priests, nuns are just as bad. historically, nunneries can be viewed as havens of abuse and brothels. look up the magdalen laundries and such: the way cunts like them and say mother teresa operated will send shivers down your spine too.

>>21062815
>>21062825
Kys tranny, you will never be a woman

>>21062866
sounds like one of the grifters' fans got a little mad. it's alright buddy, just buy yourself some youtube merch to feel a little better... uh i mean get yourself a "brown scapular" to prove your marian devotion or whatever haha

>>21062870
Enoy hell

>>21062873
Can't enjoy something that doesn't exist for me, gentile

>>21062875
>43rd IP

>>21062873
as bad as the christian clergy in general are, i'll just take my chances with the demons. i'm sure those dudes are more reasonable, we can work something out. don't discriminate against them just because they have ugly wings.

>>21061772
I just can't accept the unfair mechanics of sexual reproduction, I don't care about anti-natalism much from an intellectual or a philosophical perspective.

>>21062891
>unfair
Just make a lot of shekels.

>>21062072
This. I'm not antinalist but it seems hard to refute it being a moral/ethical stance one takes for what one believes is the best for others.

>>21062240
>life is... LE BAD!

>>21062914
suddenly antinatalism is indistinguishable from hinduism

I've been impregnating my wife for the past couple years. We have three beautiful children. No one can stop me. I will continue.

>>21062914
Blame religions.

>>21062920

>>21062923

>>21061984
It's not that antinatalism is identical to suicide or nihilism. It's just that nihilism and suicide are antinatalisms natural conclusion. If you're a sincere antinatalist but you are neither nihilisticabout life and/or want to end your life, you don't 'really' believe in antinatalist ideology. You just hate suffering and use antinatalist sophistry to cloak the truth of you just being kind of a pussy.

>>21062948
>antinatalists think that giving birth to children is irresponsible to both the child and the environment
>hurr why don’t you kill yourself you fucking pussies
I hate Americans so much bros

>>21062948
Embarrassing.
If you care about human suffering, you're not a nihilist.
As for suicide, there are multiple reasons why it's not a "natural conclusion", i.e. not having a reason for suicide, religious beliefs, minimizing suffering of others.

>>21062948
>You just hate suffering and use antinatalist sophistry to cloak the truth of you just being kind of a pussy.

this but it's only half the truth, the other half is that anti-natalist ideology, if taken to its end, is violent. if you truly believe that snuffing out life is a moral good, then you are obligated to become the next oklahoma bomber or some shit. if you put "living a cucked secular life and whining about things" versus "being a violent terrorist" into the equation, the latter clearly makes more sense for anti-natalist utility. in fact it even makes way more sense than committing suicide.

but since these fags 1) live in a society that has spooked them to death and won't even let you discuss pro-violence ideas without arrest, they have unironically internalized it and they themselves believe that violent praxis is le bad despite embracing a violent ideology, and 2) even if they did believe violence was the answer, they are too beta to actually do anything.

the reason you have never heard of the early 20th century illegalist movement in france is because they are what happens when you take violence seriously and don't just pretend violence is inherently bad when the state perpetuates it every day against you and it is the only tool you have against them because ideas and talking doesn't work. the world destroyed the illegalists so badly for this realization that those boys are no longer even a memory.

>>21062981
>minimizing suffering through violence
Based retard.

>>21062987
the violence has already started. you must simply choose whether you will participate, or remain ignorant and in denial.

>>21062992
>the violence has already started
The fuck is this supposed to mean?

>>21062996
you already live in a violent world every day full of violent actions and violence defines your very existence (the very country you were born in is a monument to violence, since its founders had a monopoly on violence in the area) so it's pretty silly for an anti-natalist so say "if you think about it, life has a negative value assigned to it" but then proceed to just do fucking nothing and be ineffectual members of their society who participate in all the expected daily faggotry.

>>21063005
Violence objectively causes more suffering.
Look at the fallout of 9/11.

>>21062920
>three kids
rookie numbers
ngube has 26

>>21063010
9/11 was a wakeup call for anybody with common sense, a single 9/11 changed the world more than any activism, any poem, movie, ideology, sermon, or anything ever will. people still will not shut the fuck up about 9/11, and it changed the world in drastic ways. the truth is, a single cut throat can be worth more than 1,000 words. islamic terrorists realize this, but westerners are too naive.

anti-natalists especially deserve scorn because they are basically just a weak version, a cargo cult, of actually violent ideologies.

>>21063018
>a single 9/11 changed the world more
Not in a good way.
You don't have a point, you can't demonstrate how terrorism or senseless violence can lessen suffering.

>>21063021
i demonstrated that it was effectual. much more effectual than activism. so literally anything and hoping for the best is better than doing nothing and letting stronger currents in the world control you.

>>21062968
>If you care about human suffering, you're not a nihilist.

/lit/ pls

>>21063021
>>21063010
>>21062996
>the violence has already started
>The fuck is this supposed to mean?
that all living organisms suffer. how many millions/billions of babies are eaten alive or dismembered within the first 24 hours of their life in the animal kingdom every day?

>you can't demonstrate how terrorism or senseless violence can lessen suffering
if you kill everyone, then there is no one to experience suffering. therefore, for the remainder of the life of the universe, there will be no suffering. the amount of suffering that will occur over the life of the universe has to be greater than the amount of suffering that has occurred since the universe is closer to its beginning than its end. therefore, whatever suffering you cause during the purge will be less than the total suffering you have prevented. therefore you should be violent and exterminate all life to prevent suffering.

this is all unironically explained on the wikipedia page for antinatalism. try reading LOL

>>21062955
>life is unbearable
>no, by unbearable I don't mean it's not worth living

>>21063209
>if you kill everyone
You can't magically kill everyone and you don't know the consequences of killing everyone.
What that anon offered isn't "killing everyone" either.

>>21063228
>You can't magically kill everyone
it doenst have to be instant. it can take 10000 years because 10000 years / remaining life of the universe == 0.00000000000000000000000000000001 or approximately 0

>you don't know the consequences of killing everyone
LMAO yeah ok man, if there is no one left in the universe, the consequences DO NOT MATTER because NO ONE IS THERE TO EXPERIENCE THE CONSEQUENCES. Are you fucking stupid?

>What that anon offered isn't "killing everyone" either.
you said terrorism OR senseless violence. what is more senseless than killing all things just because they are alive?

im not an antinatalist, but you should really KYS
verification not required

>>21063235
>it doenst have to be instant
Violence will be met with violence.
>if there is no one left in the universe, the consequences DO NOT MATTER
Antinatalism doesn't negate spiritual/religious beliefs such as afterlife.

>>21063243
>Antinatalism doesn't negate spiritual/religious beliefs such as afterlife.
yeah because you can't disprove the unprovable, if your argument for why we shouldn't kill you and everyone you have ever known right now is "God might be angry", then you are wholly unprepared for any intellectual discussion. you have bigger issues to fix if you can't figure out a logical response that doesn't involve LITERALLY MAKING THINGS UP ABOUT THE AFTERLIFE to justify your beliefs.

>Violence will be met with violence.
it literally doesn't matter. that's the point, dipshit.

>>21063250
>why we shouldn't kill you and everyone you have ever known
Who are "we"? Internet columbiners?

>>21063243
>Antinatalism doesn't negate spiritual/religious beliefs such as afterlife.

kek sure technically but find me a single mainstream religious figure who wants to kill everyone to bring them to heaven. in reality, anti-natalists are just PMC cuckolds like ligotti.

BEHOLD, THE VISAGE OF THE MAN TELLING YOU NOTHING MEANS ANYTHING AND THAT STRIKING ANOTHER HUMAN WITH YOUR BURLY ARM IS LE BAD AND IMMORAL

>>21063257
>find me a single mainstream religious figure who wants to kill everyone
>kill
Here we go again...

>>21063243
>Antinatalism doesn't negate spiritual/religious beliefs such as afterlife.
It negates Christianity at least. If you conceive of the creation of life as a negative thing you have abandoned God.

>>21063254
"we" is everyone who recognizes that you got BTFO by a guy who has only read the wikipedia page on antinatalism i.e. by a man who is a literal expert on the subject compared to you.

I don't care about antinatalists but they sure are annoying. I hate when people make a decision based upon personal preference or economic logic and hold it up as if it were a supremely moral decision.

Fact is the only reliable indicator of a person having kids is living on a farm. There, you get cheap labor and extra hands. With mechanical agriculture the only places in the world having high birthrate are shitholes where subsidence agriculture takes place. Africa and Middle East. Even Latin America is industrialized beyond it.

So our high population is something of the result of a sort of paradox. Mechanized agriculture able to feed many people and many people on small unproductive farms making more mouths to feed. It's unsustainable and it will eventually swing to one condition or another.

>>21063263
>It negates Christianity at least.
It doesn't. Christianity is cool with not procreating.

>>21063270
>Christianity is cool with not procreating.
God told Abraham to "go forth and multiply" and that he and his descendants would inhabit every piece of land on the earth. it was a literal divine order to the founder of the covenant to go and have a bunch of wives and poop out children.

>>21063270
Antinatalism does not mean simply not procreating. Stop being disingenuous, you fucking rat.

>>21063266
>"we" is everyone who recognizes that you got BTFO by a guy who has only read the wikipedia page on antinatalism
Can you provide a quote from Wikipedia that advocated for violence?

>>21063261
*ahem*

find me a single mainstream religious figure who even actually believes their eschatology bullshit and doesn't just use it to spread their seed and propagate their own family

THERE. IS THAT BETTER NIGGER. IT DOESN'T MATTER, IN THE END PIC RELATED'S PHYSIOGNOMY ARE THE ANTI-NATALISTS. CHOOSE YOUR MENTOR WISELY.

>>21063272
Tell that to voluntary celibate monks.

>>21063273
-> >>21063274

>>21063275
>mainstream
>antinatalism
Hurr durr.

>>21063274
>Can you provide a quote from Wikipedia that advocated for violence?
im about to go into a meeting, but look at antinatalist views on how to handle carnivorous animals. it's extermination/extirpation/forced sterilization

>>21063280
>celibate
>monks

scroll up in the thread, all this applies to them, priests, monks, seminary professors, whatever >>21062392
>>21062815

>>21063280
I'm not claiming anything about violence. But antinatalism posits that having children is unethical. This is antithetical to Christianity. It cannot be reconciled.

>>21063288
Ok? What about humans and the whole consciousness thing?

>>21063286
>religious people are anti-natalists too!
>fine me a mainstream one then
>uh i just meant... the rare ones!

suck my balls

>>21063290
>This is antithetical to Christianity.
>Tell that to voluntary celibate monks.

>>21063289
That doesn't negate the fact that voluntary celibacy is known to be compliant with Christianity.

>>21063292
Why would I bother finding a mainstream option for a non-mainstream philosophy?
The initial argument was that
>Antinatalism doesn't negate spiritual/religious beliefs such as afterlife.
Rarity doesn't matter.

>>21063302
>>This is antithetical to Christianity.
>>Tell that to voluntary celibate monks.
Are you retarded? There is a difference between the idea that procreation is unethical PER SE and the act of not procreating. Neither necessarily entrails the other, they are different things.

>>21063302
>Why would I bother finding a mainstream option for a non-mainstream philosophy?

because when somebody says "christcucks are like this" you can't just say "yes but what about this random christian man living in a village in bhutan?! he's a christian too!"

that's not how it works

>>21063302
>That doesn't negate the fact that voluntary celibacy is known to be compliant with Christianity.
Monks are not celibate because they believe that procreation is wrong.

>>21063306
>>21063314
Literally irrelevant anyway.
You can't cling to
>Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth.
forever.
It's just a covenant with Noah.

>>21063314
OBJECTION: monks are not celibate because they have sex regularly

>>21062392
>>21062815

i am going to keep doing this until you fellas get it. stop spreading the celibacy myth.

>>21063323
I feel like I can't get through to you at all. The issue is whether procreation is WRONG, not whether someone must do it. I can only assume you're a troll.

>>21063336
Thinking that procreation is wrong (as in bringing more children into the world, despite it being a gift) is still compatible with Christianity.

>>21063342
No it isn't. Life is inherently good and the creation of life is inherently good.

>>21063349
huh, that's pretty wild mate. i wonder if your definition of "good" is laden with a ton of pitfalls, who can say.

>>21063349
Life is good as in you shouldn't kill/do abortions. Antinatalism doesn't advocate for murder.
Thinking that procreation is "meaningless" (Ecclesiastes and such) and devoting yourself to joining the Kingdom of Heaven is still compliant with Christianity.
Don't be a whore.

>>21063351
Is that all you can come up with?
>>21063356
>Life is good as in you shouldn't kill/do abortions.
Correct, but the life being created was intrinsically good. It may have come about through evil means, e.g. rape, but that does not negate the goodness of the life.
>Antinatalism doesn't advocate for murder.
I never said that it does.
>Thinking that procreation is "meaningless" (Ecclesiastes and such) and devoting yourself to joining the Kingdom of Heaven is still compliant with Christianity.
Ecclesiastes is providing a perspective on what the world is when one is devoid of the grace of God. Having children is not meaningless, it never is, in any case, ever. Such an idea is evil. If one chooses to devote themselves completely to prayer, etc., that is good as well, but the existence of this path does not negate, condemn, or lessen the worth of the other. You are deeply deceived.

>>21063362
>Is that all you can come up with?

all you came up with was
>life is... le good
so i thought it fit

>Correct, but the life being created was intrinsically good. It may have come about through evil means, e.g. rape, but that does not negate the goodness of the life.

still haven't defined good but who cares about the rest of the shit you said

>>21063376
>still haven't defined good
Good is whatever is in accord with God and his law.

>>21061772
It's millennials coping with never getting laid, never having a stable job, and rejecting responsibility. Millennials are on route to being the most nihilistic, anti-human, anti-capitalist generation yet. And they're going to be leaders one day.... let that sink in. No one should have kids based on that fact alone. Millennials are fucked - devoid of a moral compass and open to whatever fucked ideology the internet, and their social media feed is championing MONTHLY.

>>21063379
yeah sure but that's just a cop out because it basically means
>read walls of autistic scripture to find out what i mean because god's law is apparently extremely complex and not a code written into our hearts

god's law is gay and fake because if he was serious, his law would be written in my brain like computer code instead of a spook i'm arguing about with people on 4chan

>>21063383
>god's law is gay and fake
As usual this is the sort of person arguing with me about is or is not compatible with Christianity, what Christianity teaches, etc. Not wasting my time any further.

>>21063362
>Ecclesiastes is providing a perspective on what the world is when one is devoid of the grace of God.
It doesn't. Read le Wikipedia.
The Bible doesn't advocate having children outside of very context dependent verses, like the covenant. There's no "Thou shalt not waste a single sperm in vain" commandment.

>>21063381
>And they're going to be leaders one day.... let that sink in
Do you have a bottle of soi residing on your table right now by any chance?
You're basically calling some millennials losers and then you claim that they will be leaders. Are you ok?

>>21063387
Exactly, this website is not for you, time to fuck off and go to a christcuck circlejerk where everybody believes your credulous nonsense in order to enrich the local grifter, and you can sing hyms with a snowy haired old lady, because on this anime forum we do not care.

>>21063389
>Read le Wikipedia.
Lol
>The Bible doesn't advocate having children
You still cannot understand the point I'm making after all this time. Have a good day

>>21063397
>Have a good day
Thanks, you too.

>>21063399
checked

>>21061772
Subversive Jewish ideology that is exclusively pushed on white people

>>21062140
Let's see how long they last without foreign aid

>>21062540
>Matthew Stadlen

Every.
Fucking.
Time.

>>21062474
>That has nothing to do with non-existence being preferable, and everything to do simply with avoiding pain.

Given that the absence of existence and the absence of pain seem to be one and the same thing, insofar as one wants to avoid pain, because one prefers the absence of pain, one would categorically prefer the absence of existence.

Antinatalism is for numales

>>21062807

Antinatalism is the only perennial idea.

>>21061781
Suicide is different from not being born. It's distressing and possibly painful.

>>21063270
peak retardation

>>21061984
I can understand the arguments for suicidal but antinatalism is literally the doomer conclusion of materialistic nihilism, with the only other possible conclusion being slave morality/hedonism

>>21061772
Don't ask questions just consoom: the philosophy

>>21061772
A position with a very bad base. It practically puts all morality to "suffering", which is just silly, as it puts that nothing you do in life is worth the suffering you experience, which is the opposite of anything close to a healthy mindset. Ironically enough, it is a bunch of people projecting their suffering onto others, and causing more suffering in the process for anyone who falls for their twisted proto-suicide cult.

Like most philosophies it falls apart when suicide comes into question.

Life’s a ride you can get out of at any moment.

>>21061903
I don’t think you should kill yourself, but it seems much more narcissistic to claim that it was unfair you were given life when there are millions of people struggling to maintain it.

>>21061772
Lmao look at the seethe in the thread. The same adhominem tier debunked arguments regurgitated again and again. They are angry because none of them can form a valid counter argument against anti-natalism

>>21062016
1, 3, and 4 are all excellent reasons anon and 2 is a good one to fall back on if you’re struggling certain days. If you haven’t already, might be a good idea to talk with your senpai about how you feel. Sometimes just letting out your emotions is enough to feel better.

>>21064340
All they can do is go "lmao kys" for the hundredth time.

>>21064340
>>21064346
Kike detected

Why do you never see anti natalism promoted among non whites?

>>21063897
Right but the avoidance of pain isn't absolute. He gave a cery extreme scenario that of constan unbearable suffering. Of course anyone in that situation would choose anything to stop the pain. Thats not because non existence is preferable but simply because of the extreme pain will cause someone to be willing to do anything to stop it. The person in that scenario isn't willing "i want to cease to exist" anymore than the trapped starving rat willed to eat itself.
Perception of pain is subjective, there is no absolute good to always lessen pain. And if you say nonexistence is always preferable because there is no pain ... There is no anything, so how could the state of nonexistence be ascribed a positive condition (e.g worse, bad, good, better)? You have yet to answer this question.

>>21062783
That's my point.... You don't, so how can you say it's a "better" state?
We only measure better v.s worse relative to our own experience.

>>21062771
No, i gave you my answer I would choose nonexistence if it was eternal constant pain v.s nonexistence.
That doesn't make the state of nonexistence preferable, because a non-state can't be any kind of state. It just makes the former option terrible. Thankfully in real life thats not the choice we face.

>>21064682
Because no experience is better than horrible experience. Do you not agree with this? Would you rather be tortured than not feel anything?

>>21064690
>I prefer
>But I'm actually not prefering
Amazing mental gymnastics, buffoon.

>eternal constant pain
>Thankfully in real life thats not the choice we face.
Life is not eternal constant pain, but it is eternal intermittent, recurring pain; suffering is an essential part of it. If you are getting tortured but receive a candy once in a while, would you say it is all good?

>>21064340
This.

>>21064873
>no experience is better than horrible experience.
No experience isn't anything so it can't be better or worse than anything. It just is. Better or worse is measired relative to an agent perceiving things as better or worse.

>>21064873
>If you are getting tortured but receive a candy once in a while, would you say it is all good?
I don't think that's a fair analogy to what life is like for most people. There are moments of torture and moments of bliss. Certainly not constant torture. Maybe you just have a shit life.
In any case there is only this life nothing more, so I don't see the attractuon of throwing that away.
Once you become nothing there exists no better v.s worse, it's nothing, so why would i prefer a non-state? I enjoy living.

Antinatalism, like suicide, is a knee-jerk response to the paradox of human existence.

The paradox is our special privilege of understanding. Everything in nature has a simple mandate; Avoid pain, avoid destruction, reproduce. The squirrel in the tree has no concept of inevitability. It simply gets to be. The sunflower goes through its whole lifecycle without any pause for utility or purpose.

No so for unlucky man. We're not allowed any such delusion. Only in man lay a certainty that all of his efforts are ultimately for not. He will encounter pain, he will die, everything he makes will encounter degradation and expiration. Only we have a crystalized view of those concepts. So he outsources that knowledge into the abstract. We create purpose, reward, achievement, etc. Anything but what we know is the truth.

Even antinatalism is some lofty project of control. Antinatalists love dopamine like everybody else, and the get it in the form of their "solution." So why would they kill themselves if they've found their drug?

>>21064895
>>I prefer
>>But I'm actually not prefering
>Amazing mental gymnastics, buffoon.
You don't seem to get the point. You aren't preferring the not-being in that situation but rather hating your current state/condition of being.
Do you think the starving trapped rat that are itself really preferred to eat itself.

>>21064910
*ate itself

>>21061772
Not a fan of it. We are assuming that the person would hate life as much as me so we should spare them the trouble. The issue with that is of course people experience things differently.

>>21061772
Myopic and childish philosophy if taken seriously (as by redditors), but based if employed to annoy normalfags (as by the people who actually write books in favour of it). David Benetar is clearly a provocateur who likes pissing people off by pointing out flaws in their reasoning, which is why he has top tier takes on rape and pedophilia, but the sad little ledditors who actually believe in voluntary human extinction rely on a handful of assumptions:

(1) self contradictory nihilism (life is meaningless, but averting pain isn't)
(2) conscious experience is created de novo by the birth of animals
(3) the universe is temporally finite, and conscious experience will not arise over and over for eternity
(4) (if you don't believe 3) human lives are more painful than the average non-human life

If you're going to philosophize your way into a position that advocates the termination of humanity, suggesting you philosophize about metaphysics, individuation, or cosmology (which is very pertinent to your philosophy) isn't a stretch. If you believe in reductive materialism and worship at the alter of science, cyclical cosmology is practically mainstream among physicists at this point (so all your onions derived atoms will rearrange themselves in the exact same way at some time in the future, and you'll have to pay your landlord rent and drive around an unwalkable city in your energy inefficient car for eternity).

If you believe a temporally finite, purposeless universe, where conscious experience is generated de novo by the birth of animals, and you also believe in an extreme form of negative utilitarianism (despite being a nihilist), sure antinatalism makes sense. But funnily enough, you'll never find reddit antinatalists advocating nuclear genocide, or total nigger death (the majority of human suffering on the planet is currently due to niggers, just see those webms of African nigger decapitation on /gif/) when it's the logical conclusion of their philosophy.

>>21061772
Antinatalists are a non-negligible part of what makes life more difficult to live for normal human beings. If anti-natalists truly wanted a better existence, then they would kill themselves. Not to be consequent with their own beliefs, but to spare us having to deal with theirs.

>>21061772
https://www.abolitionist.com/anti-natalism.html

>Benatar's policy prescription is untenable. Radical anti-natalism as a recipe for human extinction will fail because any predisposition to share that bias will be weeded out of the population. Radical anti-natalist ethics is self-defeating: there will always be selection pressure against its practitioners. Complications aside, any predisposition not to have children or to adopt is genetically maladaptive. On a personal level, the decision not to bring more suffering into the world and forgo having children is morally admirable. But voluntary childlessness or adoption is not a global solution to the problem of suffering.

>Yet how should rational moral agents behave if - hypothetically - some variant of Benatar's diagnosis as distinct from policy prescription was correct?

>In an era of biotechnology and unnatural selection, an alternative to anti-natalism is the world-wide adoption of genetically preprogrammed well-being. For there needn't be selection pressure against gradients of lifelong adaptive bliss - i.e. a radical recalibration of the hedonic treadmill. The only way to eradicate the biological substrates of unpleasantness - and thereby prevent the harm of Darwinian existence - is not vainly to champion life's eradication, but instead to ensure that sentient life is inherently blissful. More specifically, the impending reproductive revolution of designer babies is likely to witness intense selection pressure against the harmfulness-promoting adaptations that increased the inclusive fitness of our genes in the ancestral environment of adaptation. If we use biotechnology wisely, then gradients of genetically preprogrammed well-being can make all sentient life subjectively rewarding - indeed wonderful beyond the human imagination. So in common with "positive" utilitarians, the "negative" utilitarian would do better to argue for genetically preprogrammed superhappiness.

>>21063243
>>21063250
suicide is merely an apparent means of ending existence, read Schopenhauer's essay

>>21066309
*edit
yes I know what you're going to say, but he proposes a just suspicion of any purely empirical means of terminating existence

>>21066318
*or the creation of more
>wrong, see my reply on religion
building on a foundation of Kant's work, Schopenhauer lays out why this suspicion of the empirical methods is justified

humans will never stop having kids so it's useless mental masturbation.

antinatalism serves the same purpose that New Atheism did in the early 2010s: an easy way for beta males to feel superior to others by intellectualizing very basic ideas like "God doesn't exist", "Life is suffering"

someone that brings up antinatalism in convo is a telltale sign you're talking to an impotent pseud.

>>21064358
No one is promoting anti-natalism among whites. The whites are doing it themselves because they actually have the time and luxury to ask these questions, the liberty to challenge established norms and also have the means to prevent offsprings. And its not like the whites are having many children despite not being anti-natalists.

The people living subhuman lives in africa have every reason to be anti-natalist but in an ironic twist of fate they are the most life affirming.

>>21066562
>humans will never stop having kids so it's useless mental masturbation.

Maybe not. But as long as the anti-natalist can prevent his own future generations from the suffering of existence, he has won on a personal level.

>>21065729
pretty much this

>>21066109
I heard Benetar is very disliked in dixie. I don't care for him either since I take most jewish psychoanalysis/philosophy with a grain of salt but unlike Freud or Weininger or Simmel, there's little that be salvaged from his line of thought.

It's kinda half-assed. If human life sucks so much dick, and you're a hard-dicked (figuratively speaking) anti-natalist, shouldn't you be joining a terrorist organisation and stealing nuclear weapons, or something? You're not gonna achieve shit sitting around not making babby

>>21066948
>you're a hard-dicked (figuratively speaking) anti-natalist

that's where you fucked up lul they're just whiny queers

>>21066948
They're just hedonists playing off an economic decision as a moral decision. They don't want kids because they're children themselves. Saying it's for some edgy misanthropic reason or to save the earth is copium.

>>21066562
>antinatalism
>God doesn't exist
It doesn't intellectualize this idea because it has nothing to do with this idea.

>>21061772
Spooked. I don't care about the "possible future suffering" of my child, I care about their immediate joy and their understanding. The world isn't one where you only suffer, rather one where one is granted the gift of Suffering in order to understand it better. This gift helps them enjoy life and defeat weak pussies like the anti natalists. The only anti natalists I've ever met were weak pussies

>>21063977
>peak retardation
You may call it peak retardation as much as you want, but you can't disprove it. Neither you can ignore historical precedents.

>>21066969
I'm going to lift just to beat you into a bloody screaming mess in front of your child :^)

>>21066972
>the antinatalist reveals their true colors

>>21066972
I thought you detested suffering so badly you killed all your sperms and tell your penis it is the bringer of Suffering? You, a pussy, are willing to exercise? Do your best. Hopefully the experience of pain and suffering leading to a beneficial outcome will make you realize the gift of suffering.

>>21066994
>the gift of suffering
Suffering is truly a gift, but only when it's not me who's suffering. I might pop a boner.

>>21066991
Why would I care that some whore had a child? AN is just stupid.

>>21061772
One of the most retarded ideas in the history of the planet.

>>21061772
If we could somehow travel back in time and retroactively abort people, or, better yet, avoid they were even conceived, how many antinatalists do you think would agree to it? That tells you everything you need to know about these people.

>>21067000
Fool. Other's suffering is your suffering the moment you absorb it. If you can enjoy their suffering, your own will just as sweet.

>>21067017
>Other's suffering is your suffering the moment you absorb it. If you can enjoy their suffering, your own will just as sweet.

>>21061772
mental wankery
it logically concludes into violent misanthropy for the simple fact that voluntary extinction is impossible and "suffering" is not an objective measurement to begin with

>>21067006
That mental exercise doesn't make sense. You're basically asking how many antinatalists would be fine with never been born. But I was born and I enjoy living. That doesn't mean I believe it's okay to bring more people to this horrible world.

>>21066957
Antinatalism threads always brings forth the most ignorant people who are in favour of natalism.

>>21067038
>I enjoy living
What are you doing on 4channel then?

>>21067040
Truthfully there are fewer good arguments in favor of natalism so that's predictable. It's going to boil down to like "it is our natural biological imperative to reproduce" and "muh bibble book says here". There's not much else to say for it besides like babies are cute and things like that.

How is it determined that suffering is worse then joy and pleasure is good?

That seems to be a huge assumption made by antinatalists that I haven't seen explained.

>>21067084
Joy and pleasure are obviously better, otherwise we would kill ourselves. That still doesn't mean it isn't ethical to be an antinatalist to spare new people from suffering.

>>21067084
>How is it determined that suffering is worse then joy and pleasure is good?
It's obvious.

>>21066994
>Hopefully the experience of pain and suffering leading to a beneficial outcome
If your "suffering" leads to beneficial outcomes - that's NOT suffering.

>>21067091
This. I'm not antinatalist because I hate life. As a matter of fact I'm very happy to be alive. I'm an antinatalist because sparing suffering is simply the correct ethical choice.

>>21067101
It seems like the majority of people here don't understand the simple fact that you can come to the conclusion that antinatalism is ethical by observing your own immediate surroundings.

>>21066109
>so all your onions derived atoms will rearrange themselves in the exact same way at some time in the future, and you'll have to pay your landlord rent and drive around an unwalkable city in your energy inefficient car for eternity

tl;dr = abiogenesis turns the anti-natalists into clowns, life appeared on earth once already so even if you kill everybody life might just happen again

>>21066109
>(1) self contradictory nihilism
Literally wrong.

>>21067110
Exactly. Just because I enjoy life and I don't regret being born doesn't mean it isn't ethical to spare people from this. It's simple logic.

>>21067091
>>21067101
why is sparing people from suffering the priority if it is a lesser experience? What gives it the importance?

it is the only moral, sensible, logical, rational philosophy