/lit/ - Literature

>>22066436
THAT'S BENETAR? HAHAHAHAHA
UGLY PEOPLE'S ARGUMENTS ARE AUTOMATICALLY INVALID

>>22066436
suicide is not good, either

also, why are you as a life-affirming chap telling people to kill themselves?

>>22066470
>suicide is not good

Suicide is basically going back to non-existence, where it is impossible to suffer and where everyone that never came to existence "are"; if existence is suffering, non-existence is non-suffering, so suicide is obviously a good-decision.

>also, why are you as a life-affirming chap telling people to kill themselves?

I'm not saying that, I'm just affirming my point: antinatalism implies pro-mortalism. The average antinatalism have to cope with this because it's so fucking obvious, kek, yet, they have to find excuses to keep themselves alive at the same time they belive life is awful and not-living is good.

People are not wired to kill themselves. It’s an incredible feat to accomplish, really. Life is a miserable slog most of the time but I can’t help but want to survive anyway. That’s how we are, you make the mistake of thinking people can just will anything.

>>22066491
>Suicide is basically...
Nope. Have you ever contemplated suicide. It's clearly a very painful decision to make. It's human nature that we are predicated in our continuous survival. That the easiest way out of existence is that hard to take just compound the human impasse.. Now, some people might be in such sharp pain that this decision is simple to make. Most are not. The petty suffering, the daily indignities, the boredom and so on: is that enough to make me kill myself - and cause even more suffering to my loved ones?
I'd rather just not have children?
>I'm not saying that
yes, you are. You are begging us to kill ourselves just because we don't want to bring more people to the pain carrousel.
In any case, for this:
>they have to find excuses to keep themselves alive at the same time they belive life is awful and not-living is good.
Is that so hard? I don't think it is. I can easily convince myself to not kill myself and at the same time I don't want to bring children to this bad world. Why does that send you into such a fit of rage?

>>22066436
So now you post under the guise of a natalist to get people talking about the book.
Get help. You are genuinely mentally ill.

>>22066438
He isn't ugly. Looks better than 90% of men.

>>22066436
>white south african
he was born of guilt

>>22066436
It's simple as, if you are in pain and there is no solution to it, kys. No point in living if it's painful. Life is only worth it if it's fun.

Really no need to write whole ass books about simple shit.

>>22066658
You know you’re just a midwit, right? Actually a midwit.

>>22066436
>>22066438
That’s not what Benatar looks like, that’s just a guy who interviewed him once.

>>22066436
How I should kill myself?

>>22066512
>I can easily convince myself to not kill myself and at the same time I don't want to bring children to this bad world.
It's not the contingent desire not to have children that needs to be reconciled with living. It's the judgment that life is sufficiently bad that it's always wrong to create a life that needs to be reconciled with living. In the first case the desire could be grounded in some fact not applicable to your own state of life, in the second it certainly applies to you. What exactly would be bad about your desires, hopes, pleasures, and goals ceasing to be? On the other hand, if life is predictably bad, their ceasing to be seems quite good.

>>22066470
you don't know if suicide is bad or good.

>>22066491
death is inevitable, suicide is only a matter of choice

>>22066728
with pleasure

>>22066713
you are a shill. all shills are retards.

>>22066436
reminder: suicide was always demonized and outlawed only because slaves must work (work is suffering). universe doesn't care.

>>22066801
Which method bro?

>>22066883
one you prefer

>>22066491
You are an idiot as well. Just kys instead of sniffing others’ shit with your ki*e nose.

>>22066887
I am open to suggestion. I have heard that drowning in the sea is kino because salt water sedate you

>>22066436
Antinatalists are explicitly 100% right in that they (the antinatalists) should not reproduce.

>>22066898
> da joos
shill
>>22066926
no

>>22066933
this. if somebody is annoyed by antinatalists he is faggot.

>>22066491
>if existence is suffering, non-existence is non-suffering
If Socrates is gay, everyone who is not Socrates is not gay.

What I mean to say here is: you are gay.

>>22066817
Source?

Also, why would a slave care about the taboo of suicide given that killing himself is better than a life of slavery?

>>22067366
>The same man who says, “I don’t have the courage to kill myself,” will the next moment call cowardly an exploit before which the bravest would cringe. You kill yourself, we are forever being told, out of weakness, in order not to have to face suffering or shame. Only no one sees that it is precisely the weak who, far from trying to escape suffering or shame, accommodate themselves to such feelings—and that it requires vigor in order to win free of them decisively. In truth, it is easier to kill yourself than to vanquish a prejudice as old as man, or at least as his religions, so sadly impermeable to the supreme gesture. So long as the Church was rampant, only the madman enjoyed the favors of the regime, he alone had the right to put an end to his days: His corpse was neither profaned nor hanged. Between ancient stoicism and modern “free thought,” between, say, Seneca and Hume, suicide suffered—aside from the Catharist interlude—a long eclipse, a dark age in fact, for all those who, wanting to die, dared not infringe the ban on putting oneself to death.

Cioran The New Gods

>>22066436
>so, suicide is perfectly fine, logical, and, by the way, why haven't you kill yourself yet?
>well, actually...
Pic related was an antinatalist and actually killed himself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqeN2RRR3xQ
https://vitrifyher.wordpress.com/2019/12/19/antinatalism-in-purgatory/

>I’m an antinatalist. I think it’s unforgivable to bring new people into this world given that there is suffering. The thing is that lately I’ve been thinking and feeling that people aren’t real. This would partially solve the problem of evil. There is just my suffering and everyone else is a simulation designed to spite me. This should cause me to not feel so antinatalist since the breeders are disgusting alien mockeries of a true human being, namely myself. Yet somehow I still feel very antinatalist. When I see children with their parents I am disgusted at the entire concept. They are probably just facets of the simulation and not souls brimming with the inner light of awareness like myself. And yet they still move me enough to cause disgust. I suppose that was the intention of the designer(s), to create something that appeared so real that it was actually disturbing. Dr. Miller says I have some sort of syndrome after finding out about my solipsism. I think he’s an imbecile who deserves to be burned on a stake. But out of my bodhisattva-like compassion I would instead grant him a consciousness and send him to heaven forever.

>Like I’ve said before, it’s plausible to me that this is a punishment. My failure at making friends, then my failure at soccer, then my failure in the stock market, then my failure at university, then my crippling depression. The reason I think it’s a punishment may just be projecting a sense of justice to something that is intrinsically devoid of any anthropomorphic qualities. But it may also be that there really is intelligent design (which I now strongly feel is the case) and the reason this isn’t heaven is because the force behind existence isn’t like me. It’s not the sort of thing that would give heaven to its enemies.

>>22067416
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30OlsIZb31Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnnOhZuny_M

Sex doesn't force new life into being. It just removes boundaries between the gametes, which are distinct and separate from their producers. People pluck themselves from the void via sperm motility.

>>22066713
Namecalling is not an arguement bud

https://ashspace.org/contribs/carthago_deleta/living_as_a_suicidal.php

>>22066436
Dying is more painful than living presumably? Being born guarantees both of those.

>>22066436
physiognomy checks out

>>22066491
>antinatalism implies pro-mortalism
No, it's doesn't.

"Hurr durr if you don't want children you should kill youself" has got to be the most 60 IQ argument out there.

>>22066933
100% of antinatalists came from natalists parents.

>>22066752
Not killing myself, sorry anon.

>>22066436
David Benatar wrote some comedy articles he's proud enough to have on his university profile page. What do you think?

>>22066438
>they go for a walk in the park
>interviewer forwards the idea that life can be improved
>Benatar raises his voice and starts sperging that life never improves (objectively false by the way)
>Benatar starts crying and basically says "life is unacceptable"
>interviewer is taken aback by his outburst and at a loss for words (Benatar is inconsolable)
Benatar is pretty unstable. On top of that he admits that his ideas are damaging while using the excuse that his work is academic and only meant for those that seek it out (note that these people are likely to have personality disorders and mental illness). Benatar objectively creates suffering and given that he's under the delusion that his work is toward the opposite: he's delusional and irrational.

>>22067416
>narcissistic weeb who killed himself
Those who profess anti-natalist beliefs are more likely to suffer from personality disorders and mental illness.

>>22068189
This doesn't mean that anti-natalist arguments can be dismissed solely due to this fact; it does however add context to why autists make these threads and are completely unable to understand why they are wrong. It also has direct implications regarding Benatar's quality of life argument (i.e. anti-natalists are stuck in a rigid ideological system as a cope for to sustain their defective worldview)

>>22068191
Anti-natalists are at a complete poverty when it comes to weighing quality of life. Their defective nature simply precludes them from accepting any rationalization outside of their own self-indoctrination. They don't necessarily mean to be disingenuous because such is simply written into their nature.

>>22066713
>You know you’re just a midwit, right? Actually a midwit.

>>22066438
We literally don't know if Benatar is handsome or ugly. We don't know what it looks like
>Uhh but all jewish people is le ugly
No, Ezra Miller and Timothy Olyphant exists.

All people who have children are jewish, pedophiles and satanists.

I see it more as the parents forcing a choice onto a baby
The parents throw the dice for a potential baby which has no freedom to decide on their own
This is /lit/ so I'm not into philosophy so don't expect anything philosophically rigorous but maybe if life was always net neutral or positive with regards to happiness versus suffering I wouldn't make such a big deal out of it

>*refutes antinatalist' whole "philosophy"*
nothing personal
https://youtu.be/hNfHoVlB0EE

>>22068199

"high on" is a colloquial usage and not an academic one, and this is enough for me to regard the article with suspicion of not being a work of serious scholarship. It is reasonable to try to rationalize/pathologize/explain away the anti-natalist view as a cope, but if someone arrives at an idea or an attitude as the result of a coping mechanism, delusion or other "false" or pathological reasoning process, THIS IS NOT ENOUGH TO REJECT THE CONTENT OF THE IDEA ITSELF. This is what I call the "normie fallacy". In principle it might happen (and it is logically possible, think of implication) that the idea itself is true, and was hit upon only because the person who holds the idea is a sad loser, mentally ill, etc. Something like this is in fact the case with the anti-natalist attitude.

Cioran has a good line somewhere, which goes like this: "The proposition 'never being born is preferable to life' is one of the most unpopular ideas, and is an idea which meets with more vehement opposition than nearly all others." And it's easy to understand why. The content of the idea is obviously opposed not only to procreation, but ultimately to life itself, thus opposing two of the strongest instincts (self-preservation and reproduction/sex). Grug Hate Idea not because Grug has considered Idea seriously on its own merits (and indeed doesn't want to), but largely because Grug Programmed To Hate Idea No Matter What. That's all. Cioran also defuses the OP's canard with one of his best ideas: just because you can arrive intellectually (and correctly) at the pointlessness of life doesn't magically erase your instinct for self-preservation. These two facts are in irreconcilable tension with each other. You are yoked to your instincts for life, and only the severest mental illness frees a person from them.

There is no life so happy and fulfilled that it can honestly be defended as preferable to nonexistence. What's at stake with the normie gambit is to insist that some group of well adjusted people (rich, happy, wide social circle etc) justifies life. Again, this is just the meatbot liking what it's programmed to like and calling that an argument. When the meatbot tells someone espousing these sorts of ideas to kill himself, it's less because he finds the person odious than because he naturally finds the idea unpleasant and wants to stop thinking about it.

>IB4 "so kill urself lol"

>>22068373
the fact that an idea is unpopular doesn't make it automatically correct. Maybe, just maybe, there is some truth to it. In fact most people consider jumping from a cliff an unpopular idea that is opposed vehemently by virtually everyone.

>>22068373
>"high on" is a colloquial usage and not an academic one
Stopped reading there because you're speaking nonsense. "High on" refers to the statistical significance found within the study. Professing antinatalist beliefs is connected to suffering from mental illness and having a personality disorder. The research was replicated. Simple as.

>>22068139
I don't want you to kill yourself. I want you to recognize the value of life, which implicitly you already understand because of your firm rejection of suicide.

>>22068161
...is this real?

>>22068161
>https://humanities.uct.ac.za/department-philosophy/staff-david-benatar/humour
>It's fucking real
Good God that is amazing

>>22066436
What's your endgame, natalist? What are you striving for? What's the goal? How many life forms do you want around when the universe ends, if any?

>>22068855
Yeah. That's not even the worst one either--just the easiest to copy and post. He has another one complaining about how people drive. They're linked through his profile on the university at which he works.

>>22068876
Kek, he is a honorary 4chan(nel)er
Just like Schopenhauer, very cute

>>22068373
>"high on" is a colloquial usage and not an academic one, and this is enough for me to regard the article with suspicion of not being a work of serious scholarship.
It is very funny that you misunderstood the usage and then dismissed it as scholarship, especially because the usage is commonplace in scholarship. "High on dark triad personality traits" means "scoring high on dark triad metrics". It is not the colloquial "high on life" usage.

>>22068874
Natalist's end game is to feel less alone and more supported by his lot. Natalist doesn't want to break the primordial bro code.

>>22068883
>scoring high on dark triad metrics
Lmfaoooo who the fuck decides what are le dark triads and what are le divine light triads? Psychology is a retarded.

>>22068881
His shitposts aren't even plebbit-tier though. More like something sone posts on Imgur.

pic related tells you everything you need to know about Antinatalists.

>>22068894
>who the fuck decides
Stable people that aren't incels carried away by a book that tells them feeling miserable is a substitute for developing a personality.

>>22068894
It's a name for antisocial traits.

>>22068898
Low IQ must be a blessing

>>22068909
>Stable people
Lmfaoooo

>incels
Well ackshully Silenus was a Greek god, Omer Khayyam was a boy lover, Zapffe had wives and gfs, Cioran fucked many women, Schopenhauer was a womanizer, Benetar is married.

>>22068914
>antisocial
That's arbitrary asf.

>>22068938
It isn't arbitrary and I find it funny you want people to see value in an argument that demands one to rate subjective experience in a specific way while decrying, not disproving, the established fact that antinatalists are prone to suffer from mental illness and have personality disorders.

>>22068938
>Schopenhauer was a womanizer
Verifiably false, kek.

>>22068883

I didn't mention the dark triad thing (nor did your sympathetic rebuffer) because it struck me as an old phrase that was used by PUAs/alt-right and the like, but this is more sniffing bullshit. If the image derives from some official psychological paper, then properly read, this is simply more evidence to malign psychology in general, and as a discipline. You seem to be intelligent enough to realize that large numbers of academic articles consist of people starting with a given premise and then proceeding to simply insist/prove the thing that they've claimed.

>>22066436

>life is mostly suffering, but we can work on fixing it
>suicide isn't inherently wrong, there are many cases where it may be understandable and the least bad choice, but we should work on making those situations rarer
>reproduction for reproduction's sake is inherently wrong, but life is still worth living and continuing.
>if we reproduce, we need to put in the effort to make sure our descendants have a life worth living, in an environment capable of supporting them; all the while making life kinder and simpler, but also not forgetting the principles and traditions that brought us to this point
>different people may have different existential reasons to live, and their own limits to the amount they are willing to suffer, and we should respect both, and they should do likewise for us

>>22069245
>vague generalities about the quality of academia because he doesn't like the study
The dark triad is nomenclature for a set of well defined and intensely studied personality traits that and is so-called because there are three of them and they're commonly found within those who have a propensity for damaging social outcomes involving themselves and others.

The research was replicated.

>>22068884
I meant for the species and life in general. Like, where is life going or do they not care? Or is it to just, as you said, live for themselves and the present. A relay race to oblivion.

>>22069345
NTA but you should pay close attention to the fact that antinatalists say they're coming from a place of wanting to reduce harm but most of their defense revolves around placing themselves as superior to those that don't profess their beliefs. The WikiHow on antinatalism is mostly devoted to teaching how not to be a douchebag, kek. Lots of red flags with these people.

>>22066436
what turns a person into an antinatalist? just being unloved?

https://www.brighteon.com/a74e320d-5d76-4311-9169-4b6a0c8e4936

>>22066436
Why don't antinatalists kill other people to lessen an infinite amount of human suffering incomparable to the sin of murder? Wouldn't it be virtuous in that system to do so, advocating the death of all humans? Especially if life is suffering

>>22069359
What does the behavior of people have to do with the philosophy? All that might be true, I'm sure partly because it's a touchy subject and an unusual stance, but it's the philosophy on its own that should ultimately matter and be judged.

>>22066491
>antinatalism implies pro-mortalism

and thus u have outed yourself as a midwit. i am not going to argue with someone who doesn't even understand what he is trying (and failing) to critique

>>22068994
He wasn't a womanizer in the chad sense of the word. He spent a lot of money fucking and being a sugar daddy for whores and courtesans if I remember correctly. It makes sense why his view of women became so negative and why he felt like sex and intimacy were in the end of the day vain and empty.

>>22066436
Antinatalism is justified on an overpopulated planet hat has a very high chance of drifting into irreversible environmental apocalypse. It also justifies why we shouldn't commit suicide. There may be too many people on the planet so we all need to stop having more, but at the very least we can live our lives to improve the future of the ones who will, inevitably, be around for a bit longer.

>>22066436
Now that we’re here, our ingrained desire to exist is too strong to subvert through suicide. In a godless world, however, Benatar is right

>>22066436
I'm an anti-natalist and I have never considered suicide because of religious reasons.

>>22069718
That's eugenics, not anti-natalism.

>>22069573
>What does the behavior of people have to do with the philosophy?
They're delusional narcissists who don't actually care about the idea of harm reduction that supposedly underpins their belief system. Combine that with the fact antinatalism is logically consistent with amoral outcomes and you understand why it's bunk and the people who advocate for it are losers. Aside, these are hardly the best mediators when it comes to the quality of life aspect of Benatar's argument.

>>22069714
He's on record lamenting that women weren't interested in him. He was a quasi-incel.

>>22066436
Antinatalists are nihilists. The proper way to dialog with a nihilist is with a blunt object in their head

>>22069967
shill. shills are best proof antinatalists are right.

>>22069718
you don't improve anything, you are useless eater

>>22069545
it's illegal and troublesome. let those who suffer cause problems to their relatives, so they have more stress and die sooner.

>>22066926
Nembutals