/lit/ - Literature

>>4498680
Probably not, but I give a lot of shit a chance.

>>4498680
Interesting concept, but it would all depend on the execution, as we most things

i would read a novel about pretty much anything if the prose or the insight was worthwhile

>>4498680
Not unless it had amazing prose.

>Would I read a book about modern culture?
No, I already live in this miserable society. Reading about is the last thing I want to do.

>>4498680
I'm actually writing that character as a villain

>>4498700
is that a general criteria for you or is it specific to this concept

>>4498704
>modern society
>anti-natalist
how?

>>4498680
Of course, I'm already writing it myself.

>>4498706
Specific to the concept, because I think the concept lends itself to cliches and edgyness.

>>4498680
It sounds shit I wouldn't read a book of the same quality as a 180 page whiny 4chan post. However if it could make me realize something novel about the human condition I would (don't force it)

>>4498728
exactly what I was thinking. these selfish motherfuckers can't stop birthing more meatbags

>>4498704
>born in le wrong time xD

>>4498743
can you extrapolate on your empty buzzwords so you don't come off sounding like a retard?

>>4498747
did you know breeders say anti-natalists are selfish?
It's pretty funny.

>>4498744
Sounds like you have an emotional aversion to the ideology as opposed to an actually justified one. You're not alone, almost everyone who encounters anti-natalism as a concept has this kind of reactionary response. I assume it's a defense mechanism in out biological programming and few have the constitution to overcome it.

>>4498757
lol, and how do they justify that, exactly?

>>4498750
>brushing off an all-encompassing societal issue with le epic maymays


>>>/b/

>>4498763
you're supposedly egotistical because you don't intend to devote your life to a tiny version of yourself. don't ask for further explanations, because they usually don't provide any and I sure as hell don't know what kind of logic this is.

>>4498767
*tips fedora*

>>4498753
I could, but that concept isn't worth the effort. Also, you'll never actually write it, and if you did odds are phenomenal that it would be shit.

>>4498763
Because we are all afraid to commit to something. The pessimist is the one who never loses, because he never tries.

Only if it has a good story and doesn't try really hard to impress me with the complexity of its wording like it was written by a 22 year old lit student.

>>4498780
I'm not afraid, I just fail to see the value. You could also say I'm pretty committed to anti-natalism.

>>4498767
name a less time in the past in which you would rather live

>>4498793
The natalist would say your just rationalizing and you're committing to a non-choice.

>>4498805
you're

>>4498798
i'm an anti-natalist, so none preferably. i was defending the other poster's right to notice how fucked everything is, regardless of time-frame

>>4498763
Antinatalism is depriving hypothetical humans from existence and existence is a precious/sacred/pretty cool gift. Same reason as anti-abortion folks mostly.

>>4498680
>anti-natalism
>killing people
And I though it was all about not giving birth, but now it's about the total extinction of life on the planet by violent means. Silly me.

>>4498805
Well they would be incorrect.

>>4498810
It has to be fucked in comparison to something else, otherwise 'fucked' doesn't mean anything.

>>4498812
so we're just two diametrically opposed viewpoints butting heads. great. it all comes down to who can make the better argument about the negative or positive value of existence.

>>4498680
Sounds excessively edgy and silly.

>>4498812
And how do they justify not having more than 20 sons?

>>4498825
hint: it's the anti-natalists

>>4498821
in comparison to non-existence, obviously

>>4498776
so you don't have an argument. typical natalist

>>4498825
>>4498830
That all depends on to which you're intuitively inclined really. It's like arguing ice cream flavours.

Although when you get down to it, both are equally retarded, since ascribing either positive or negative value to existence is impossible if you have nothing to compare it with.

>>4498824
Same reason antinatalists justify not committing suicide I guess. Cowardice and weakness.

>>4498836
>since ascribing either positive or negative value to existence is impossible if you have nothing to compare it with.

why?

>>4498836
You don't need to ascribe value to existence to be an anti-natalist.

>>4498814
yep, silly you. anti-natalism assigns a negative value to all existence

>>4498832
You can't compare a thing to the lack of a thing. It would be a comparison with one thing. It's like pointing to the Eiffel Tower and asking 'which is the best'?

>>4498837
What does anti-natalism have to do with suicide?
Are you implying anti-natalism=Schopenhauer? Because that would be wrong because:
1. Schopenhauer dismisses suicide because it doesn't help to end suffering, and
2. Anti-natalism is defended by a lot of people and they all have different motivations to defend it.

>>4498750
at least his getup is consistent. Most retards just slap a fedora on and consider themselves cultured. I would gladly get a pint with this guy

>>4498851
Antinatalists consider existence a negative, have the remedy available and refrain from using it.

>>4498845
i can't easily compare consciousness to not being conscious. not being conscious is infinitely preferably.

>>4498837
i'm an anti-natalist and i'll be committing suicide quite soon

>>4498844
It doesn't. You can defend anti-natalism without ascribing any inherent value to existence. You can be anti-natalist because you are a misanthrope.

>>4498826
try again without empty buzzwords

>>4498858
But that's a strawman.

>>4498855
You can't reasonably prefer something you haven't experienced. Unconsciousness can per definition never be experienced.

>>4498866
you're just grasping at straws here. it's a limitation of language and it's not mirrored in reality

>>4498870
Describe non-existence.

>>4498845
No, it's like pointing at the eiffel tower, then pointing to a landscape devoid of any eiffel tower whatsoever and then asking which one is better.
>You can't compare a thing to the lack of a thing.
Is it better to have a bullet wound, or no wounds at all?

>>4498874
it's the same as when you're asleep

>>4498880
So fucking pretty women up the ass on the edge of a basin full of tiny smiling dolphins?

>>4498882
You knew exactly what he meant. You're losing this argument hard.

>>4498840
pls respond, i've never understood this line of thinking

>>4498895
I know what he means and he is wrong. Sleep is far from nothingness.

>>4498863
misanthropy is just a value judgement, though

>>4498901
no it isn't, it's exactly the same from the point of view of our conciousness

>>4498898
Ascribing such features relies on a context. When I say "this is a hard mattress" I do so having experienced softer mattresses. If I say "this is a rather good hamburger" I do this in comparison to other hamburgers I have experience with and conclude that as far as burgers go, this one is to my liking. A girl is only pretty compared to other girls. Hot water is hot compared to cold water. In the same way existence can only be deemed bad compared to something better. But people have never experienced something better than existence because existence is all there is. Therefore you can't judge existence as a whole. It's like saying a solitary jogger has lost the race.

>>4498898
You can never know if what x has that y doesn't have it so you can't know that x is better.

>>4498902
It's way wider than this. Anyway, how would this imply you can't be an anti-natalist because you're a misanthrope?

>>4498919
Sleeping people aren't brain dead silly.

>>4498924
So how many bullet wounds are you willing to experience before you can tell me you want exactly zero bullet wounds in your body?

>>4498924
your whole argument kinda falls apart with simple analogies i.e. >>4498875

>>4498919
How do you know that? Because you feel that way? Intuition? How? Best analogy?

>>4498939
because i've not existed before

>>4498934
your point being what exactly

>>4498680


no because thats stupid.

unless its a serious deconstruction thereof (in order to be more perfectly anti-natalistic, would that not mean instead embracing life affirming virtues to more effectively destroy the universe? isint it contradictory to not simply kill yourself, but irresponsible to not ensure life can never reappear anywhere else ever first? or something along those lines)

>>4498935
>>4498937
A landscape without an Eiffel tower is still a thing that can be compared to another thing. A lack of bullet wounds, in this case, is an intact body. So it's a comparison between an intact body and a damaged one. Both valid comparisons.

>>4498945
Can you remember anything prenatal? Lel

Anti-natalists are bullshit artists.

>>4498945
You're contradicting yourself in that very sentence.

>>4498949
There's conciousness going on.

>>4498953
and how do you know non-existence is not a thing?

>>4498961
Same reason I know that a square isn't a circle, it's implied in the very concept.

>>4498955
schop would like a word with you

>>4498953
>Both valid comparisons.
Of course. I wouldn't make an argument that doesn't make sense. That's the whole point, the comparison can be made.
Your girlfriend comes along and asks if you want some cake. You say no. You chose non-cake. You will never experience that particular cake. Yet you made your decision, based on whatever reason.

Allowing (or, god forbid, supporting) the continuation of suffering because of a supposed contradiction in recognizing existence as a negative is about as evil a thing as I can conceive. You people would rather be right than alleviate the problems of others.

>>4498965
once again, that's a limitation of language and logic, both of which are flawed human constructs

>>4498979
You don't merely choose non-cake, you choose living your life without ingesting that particular cake. Preferring non-existence on the other hand is nonsensical since non-existence is an empty signifier. It can't be preferred since it doesn't exist. A comparison requires at least two things. Non-existence isn't a thing.

>>4498955
Not really, you're just looking at it the wrong way. You can't suffer if you don't exist.

>>4498995
It's a limit of conceptual thought. Antinatalism fails to acknowledge that limit. That's why it's nonsensical.

>>4498997
>it doesn't exist
The concept exists.

>>4499009
Note 'empty signifier'.

>>4499009
It actually doesn't. That's what makes antinatalism so strange. It's a preference for what can't be conceived of.

>>4499017
But it can be concieved

>>4499017
The harm that coming into existence creates is avoidable and pointless.

>>4499012
I noted everything you said. It's pretty easy because it's the same sentence being repeated over and over again. You've been explained what the point is and understood it, but for some reason you decided that the semantics is more important than the whole idea that is being discussed.
What it boils down to is this:
Life implies stuff. Some people think that stuff is not worth it, therefore wish they wouldn't have to be subject to it.
>but you can't experience non-experience!
yes, that's the whole point. if one thinks experience leads to bad results, of course non-experience is their way to go. Please don't rephrase what you've been saying for the whole thread another time.

>>4499022
If it can be conceived of it has features. If it has features it exists, at least conceptually. If it exists in some form, it's not non-existence. Non-existence, per definition, can't be the subject of contemplation.

>>4499017
So you're a nihilist, I take it?

>>4499034
stop reading aquinas.

Is this a newly popular subject? I keep seeing antinatalism these days.

I'd read the antinatalist book if it didn't include a serial killer. Serial killers are so overdone and their popularity has faded, hasn't it? Remove the pop culture protagonist and make him something serious, like a McDonald's employee. Haha.

>>4498864
It sounds excessively dark for the sake of being dark and the concept is laughable to me.

>>4499033
The semantics are important because the whole argument relies on it. Antinatalists use non-existence as if the word actually refers to a concept, but it doesn't. You could replace it with "zdkhwedewd" or some sort of gibberish and the discussion would be the same.

>>4499040
How does that follow?

>>4499044
No, Tommy is cool.

Can any of you /x/ faggots tell me which episode of ancient aliens I should watch?

>>4499079
because you don't think value judgements are possible

>>4499085
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYop4XylQZo

watch this sick documentary on mermaids instead bro

they exist btw

>>4499069
but the concept exists. you have difficulty imagining it, because your mind is surrounded by existence, but it's there. Not feeling anything at all is an idea that exists.

>>4499090
I think value judgements need subjects. Non-existence can't be conceived of and thereby can't be preferred.

>>4499108
Non-existence isn't really preferred, it's just there as an option by elimination.

the best part of antinatalists is that most of them wont reproduce

all the benefits of suicide without the pressures of making an immediate decision

too too easy.

>>4499114
Well, that was the whole point, Sherlock.
The sad part is that you natalists won't stop shitting your retarded living abortions around the place.

>>4499103
The concept doesn't exist, people use the word non-existence to refer to something they can conceive of. They apply the word in a flawed way. What they think they're referring to isn't non-existence, since that can't be referred to, and what they are referring to is actually some sort of existence.

"Not feeling anything" is an idea that exists because we can conceive of being concious without feeling anything. We can imagine something with the absence of feeling, like we can imagine Paris without the Eiffel Tower. Non-existence doesn't refer to an existing idea since we can't conceive of something without existence.

>>4499109
It's not an option because it's not anything. The word non-existence doesn't refer to anything. It's not an option any more than 'ekjfbwehjfeb' is.

>>4499122
Why did humans invent the word 'nothing'?

>>4499129
Nothing is a perfectly practical term in the right context.

"Did you go to the mall?
"Yes."
"What did you buy?"
"Nothing."

It works in this context. Nothing refers to the lack of making a purchase in the mall. In itself though, "nothing" doesn't refer at all. It's a word that relies completely on context.

>>4499126
Of course it's an option, even though your autism doesn't allow you to see it. I know I haven't experienced the lack of experience, but I can say I don't want to experience anymore if I get fed up with experience.

You guys know OP made this thread specifically to cause this pointless argument, right? There's no reasoning with someone who not only wishes to be dead, but wishes that they could take everyone else out with them.

The kind of suffering they are describing isn't real unless you have a mental illness, which in many cases can be treated by something other than a killing blow.

>>4499135
Exactly, just like when someone says he prefers non-existence. It depends on the context.

>>4499139
>You guys know OP
The real question is, why do you give a fuck about OP?

>>4499138
>Of course it's an option, even though your autism doesn't allow you to see it.
I just explained how the word non-existence doesn't refer to anything. Seeing it as an alternative to life is like seeing "krejshsd befbh" as a valid method of evacuation of earthquake victims.

>I know I haven't experienced the lack of experience, but I can say I don't want to experience anymore if I get fed up with experience.
Of course you can say it, but it wouldn't mean anything, sincere there is no alternative to existence.

>>4499143
Because I am seeking an alternative way to end the suffering of the people in this thread.

>>4499141
Except non-existence can't have context, which is why it's an empty phrase that doesn't mean anything.

antinatalism is what happens when depressed people refuse to accept they're just depressed

>>4499057
then you're unintelligent

>>4499171
and spooked.

>>4499174
yes, hideously spooked

>>4499139
>The kind of suffering they are describing isn't real unless you have a mental illness, which in many cases can be treated by something other than a killing blow.

that's some first class false causation you've got there

>>4499180

>>4499156
Nothing means anything, I don't why you're so hung up on this particular concept lacking meaning

>>4499171
lol do you genuinely believe that

furthermore i'd state you'd have to be pretty delusional not to be depressed

>>4499206
>i'd state you'd have to be pretty delusional not to be depressed
ahahaha this is the exact shit im talking about, oh god it must be so awful to be you

>>4499204
Except that's not true. "Ice cream" is a word that refers to a certain context in conversation. "Non-existence" does not.

You can easily explain to someone what you mean when you use the word ice cream. You can't explain what you mean by non-existence, since it's a nonsensical phrase.

>>4499156
Non-existence means anything that's not existence in particular.

>>4499147
Well, my existence as a human depends of me being born. As opposed to it there's me not being born. here you have the context.

>>4499212
i think he meant lacking meaning in a nihilistic sense

>>4498750
Quite the bulge there chap

>>4499210
nice argument. another trip for the filter

>>4499227
Hi, newcomer, enjoying your time on this thread?

>>4499206
If that were true, not being depressed would still be preferable. There's nothing wrong with delusion in itself. If delusion makes life unproblematic, enjoyable and beautiful, why not be delusional? Truth has no inherent value.

>>4499232
not really. i was lead to believe the majority of /lit/ were intelligent

>>4499206
Disillusionment and depression may occur simultaneously but they are not mutually inclusive.

>>4499237
There's a lot wrong delusion. Fuck off with your nihilistic bullshit.

>>4499253
Please explain how truth has inherent value, cutie flute.

>>4499253
I'm not that guy but let's take a step back from the edge--what is deluded about not being depressed?

>>4499253
>i'd rather suffer for my arbitrary ideals than be a happy nihilist

>>4499256
ignorance of suffering perpetuates it

>>4499262
>implying happiness is possible

top kek

>>4499257
look at the state of the world

>>4499278
Except most people consider life worthwhile so the delusion takes away enough suffering to make it a good deal.

Hey antinatalists, if you prohibit humans from coming into existence life will just suffer in other, non-human forms. You can't cheat the Will.

>>4499296
>most people

loooool. possible most in the western world, but even then i'm doubtful

>>4499301
That's why we invented nukes

>>4499294
Why should it depress me?

>>4499248
>4chan
>intelligent people
Well, better discover it sooner than later.

>>4499286
the grapes are sweet m8

>>4499237
I like it how the picture completely misses the point.
The antinatalist wants to be out of the pound.

>>4499303
Do you think that most people that aren't Westeners would rather be dead?

Top kretek.

>>4499262
My shitty image created with paint being used by someone? I'm appalled.

>>4499294
there is an abundance of pain in life no doubt m10 but until you realize that you'd rather enjoy yourself than be self-righteous enjoy rotting in the hell of your own spooky misery

Sometimes I think about the hubris it must take to yank a soul out of nonexistence into this…meat; to force a life into the thresher.

>>4499318
You miss the point. He's an antinatalist because of his own shitty position and tries the best he can to share that position with others. When you tell him to get out of the hole, he screams that the world is a hole and that you're in it too, and wet, and cold, and suffering. While you're enjoying the sunshine.

>>4499301
That's a good point. My anti-natalism applies only to humans, and not to stop their suffering.

>>4499331
Except most of the planet isn't living in such idyllic circumstances.

>>4499307
Nukes won't eradicate all life on earth, and even if they do they don't guarantee that life won't start again. Not to speak of life elsewhere in the universe. You'd have to destroy existence itself. Start working on your metaphysical bombs.

>>4499331
>telling others why they hold their positions

top fucking kek. i knew /lit/ had a penchant for superciliousness, but god damn

>>4499301
When did antiNATALism become antiLIFEism?

>>4499121

the whole point is that it's the too too easy option? i agree.

sorry you're too embittered to do anything but negate.

i respect sociopaths more than you fuckheads.

which is to say, i see your peripheral function and even the beauty behind your thought process, but it's not only incoherent in the grand scheme of things(read: that scheme which happens to happen), it's also impractical save for anything besides self-validation and the proliferation of critical thought processes in those who don't bear the full brunt of the antinatalist stance.

i'll care more about you fucks when you evolve into active antinatalism to an extent that's substantial, aka not in my lifetime, and not in a lifetime when it'll even matter.

radicalize or bust pussies, the sooner the better for us all.

>>4499335
Most of the planet isn't claiming that human existence is bad and that it should be done away with. Most people ,even those in troublesome parts of the world, like to have keks and shake their rumps and enjoy looking at babbies and making them and raising them and cherishing them and general joie de vivre type shit. If anything, antinatalism is a symptom of complacence.

>>4499329
poetic

>>4499337
If life was shit for everyone antinatalists wouldn't have such a hard time to get people to agree with them.

Sounds fucking awful.

>>4499360
because happy people are delusional and truth is supreme force of the universe

>>4499323
its beautiful anon, it will become a household classic

>>4499373
Who cares m8? Feels good to be happy.

>>4498680

No, because it would probably be edgy bullshit. If I wanted to read shitty self-consciously edgy emo-teen bullshit, I'd read any Fantasy book made in the last several years.

>>4499373

>happy people are delusional
very much correct if that's the stance you're making judgments from, but so are you, from that same stance. you're just the easy kind of delusional. negations all around, reject everything and convince yourself you're secure by expecting the worst.

it's like you don't even try.

tryharder

>>4499385

Perfect reference.

>>4498680

if you write it, it should be in the same vein as notes from underground or it'll be thrown with great force.

that'd imply you're any good at writing though. meet your biases head on and you might eventually do so though.

>>4499389

sorry, you're not expecting the worst, you're hoping for the worst. i should be clear on that.

>>4499349
I can't sterilize all humanity.

What I really can't handle about this thread is the way that the people making arguments in opposition to anti-natalism seem to be conceding the point that wishing for nonexistence is the basic condition of existing. Why are you all turning this into an argument about whether or not it is better to be miserable, or to be deluded into happiness?

Why doesn't anyone assent that there is such a thing as an honest life that isn't miserable?

>>4499444
Antinatalists claim chocolate ice cream tastes bad and that everyone who enjoys said objectively bad ice cream is delusional and that their enjoyment is dumb.

So you'd only think you're living a honest life that isn't miserable because you're dumb as fuck and wrong and you should wake up and realise that your worthwhile life is actually shit and lobby for the extinction of humanity, starting by robbing all people of their joy because your misery is objectively right.

>>4499444
Already did, bud.
>>4499249

>>4499444
I agree with your point and your trips. But the point of the kind of anti-natalism discussed the most in this thread isn't that all and every single life in particular is miserable. The point is (I think) that life in general is suffering, too much to be compensated by the sparkles of happiness found here and there. I could somehow agree with this, but I don't think suffering is itself bad nor it makes life something that isn't worth experiencing.

>>4499446
That's a strawman. Not a very elaborate one, btw.

>>4499456
It isn't. Antinatalism rests on mere value judgements that are as arbitrary as the rest.

>>4499462
>>4499456
It could be correct and still be a strawman.

Asserting otherwise is a "fallacy fallacy."

Your double negatives have become confused, and you have got this all wrong.

How is he supposed to be an anti-natalistic anti-hero if he's trying to spare the suffering of his fellows, unless you are subscribing to anti-natalist principles which preclude more active human extinction programmes than abstinence?

You're certainly more in the American tradition of anti-heroes, in that during the suffering of existence the MC manages to kill more than an Arab, but I can't imagine this being defined enough that illegally copying Notes from the Underground despite its free domain status in one of your Starbucks wouldn't be a more anti-heroic statement than your MC will muster.

Perhaps make it a story about a man who castrates himself slowly, describing in graphic detail of his sensations and anxieties approaching true anti-natalism over about two hundred pages based entirely in autobiographical research?

Make it about antinatalist who's had a vasectomy and fucks bitches and then falls mutually in love with a woman but then realises something went wrong and he's fertile after all and she becomes pregnant and wants to keep the child and refuses to get an abortion.

This can go either in murderous chase across the country or just sort of internal suffering and delving into alcoholism and depression as he sees her belly grow and maybe stabbing her gut with a knitting needle while she sleeps or trying to feed her miscarriage inducers secretly or something it's all beautiful possibility.

>>4499462
>Antinatalists claim chocolate ice cream tastes bad
Not all of them do. But let's take that portion.
>and that everyone who enjoys said objectively bad ice cream is delusional and that their enjoyment is dumb.
No, the only dumb thing here is your strawman. You can enjoy stuff in life being deluded or not. It doesn't mean all the pain life gets as a whole is compensated. Someone who thinks life is objectively bad would say you're deluded when you say chocolate ice cream tastes objectively good is objectively good and that everyone who dislikes said objectively good ice cream is delusional and that their displeasure is dumb.

>So you'd only think you're living a honest life that isn't miserable because you're dumb as fuck and wrong
No. The only dumb as fuck and wrong option would be assuming life in general is inherently good because you've been living a good, luxurious life until now.
>and you should wake up and realise that your worthwhile life is actually shit
>More like wake up and realize that what makes your life worthwhile will be gone sooner or later and that there's a lot of other people who isn't as lucky as you.
>and lobby for the extinction of humanity,
Well, this is true.
>starting by robbing all people of their joy
This is entirely your magnificent creation of straws.
>because your misery is objectively right.
The anti-natalist perspective we were taking in particular doesn't talk about his own misery alone. If that was the problem there would be no need to care for others.

Concluding: bullshit and straw. A fuckload of straw.

>>4499492
No, let him make her miscarry but go crazy trying to steal his sperm, then spend the rest of the book delving into blue balled madness because she goes through all his trash and scrapes shit out of the ubend to try to get pregnant with him again.

>>4499294


yeah what about the world? you think its a bad thing that jack has more stuff than jake? and that if jacks will always come out over jakes, this means its *being* that is inherently flawed, and not your preconceptions?

if we presuppose 'enlightenment' values and ideals as the whole of value and idealism, then certainly nihilism is the only way out of that system, from within the system.

Whoever wants summarily to test the assertion that the pleasure in the world outweighs the pain, or at any rate that the two balance each other, should compare the feelings of an animal that is devouring another with those of that other.

All satisfaction, or what is commonly called happiness, is really and essentially always negative only, and never positive. It is not a gratification which comes to us originally and of itself, but it must always be the satisfaction of a wish. For desire, that is to say, want [or will], is the precedent condition of every pleasure; but with the satisfaction, the desire and therefore the pleasure cease; and so the satisfaction or gratification can never be more than deliverance from a pain, from a want.

>>4499629
>All satisfaction is the satisfaction of a wish
What about the high caused by MDMA? What wish does that fulfill? The wish for satisfaction? Because if you assert that satisfaction isn't satisfaction, but actually the satisfaction of the need for satisfaction, then you have lost your head.

Antinatalism is the folly of young men who believe that their meager experience is profound.

Ironically you'd think that posters on /lit/ would've actually read a book or two and realized that every single "profound" thought they've ever had was nothing more than the usual reaction to events every man experiences in his life.

>>4499629
there's no such thing as happiness or satisfaction, only the staving off of misery. that's the point, happiness is just an idea to tap into to look forward to a point where you've learned how to stave off misery.

i know exactly what you're saying.

what i'm saying is that you're taking the easy way out.

and the only victim to that easy way out is you.

>>4499632
>What about the high caused by MDMA? What wish does that fulfill?

deliverance from pain

>>4499629

also, nice schopcopypaste, you lazy fuck.

>>4499655
That's absurd. What if, for the sake of argument, you took MDMA at a moment when you were already receiving satisfaction?

>>4499659
>Missing your opportunity to say "schopypasta"

>>4499661
Re-read the first post you responded, except this actually comprehend it.

>>4499644
epic strawman bro

>>4499677
But it is possible to experience a chemical high without even having a concept of need. A newborn chipmunk could feel a chemical high.

>>4499652
>what i'm saying is that you're taking the easy way out.

>and the only victim to that easy way out is you.

so why don't you make an argument in favor of these conclusions instead of stating them as fact

>>4499685
you want to get high so you take MDMA thereby fulfilling that want

>>4499652
Even the moments of satisfaction, when repeated often enough, only lead to boredom and thus human existence is constantly swinging "like a pendulum to and fro between pain and boredom, and these two are in fact its ultimate constituents". This ironic cycle eventually allows us to see the inherent vanity at the truth of existence and to realize that the purpose of our existence is not to be happy.

>>4499697
What if you were dosed without your knowledge?

i watched that yale class on "how do u live if u kno ur gonna die" well that shit was gay as shit. the fucking dude jew running spends a grand total of three minutes on buddhism and then dismisses it all saying "hey, man, i'm an old testament kind of guy...got created life and it was good!". wow, nice refutation of samsara u fucktard. u really was expecting more from yale man...

i watched that yale class on "how do u live if u kno ur gonna die" well that shit was gay as shit. the fucking jewish dude running the class spends a grand total of three minutes on buddhism and then dismisses it all saying "hey, man, i'm an old testament kind of guy...god created life and it was good!". wow, nice refutation u fucktard. u really was expecting more from yale man...

Give me one good reason not to kill myself right now.

>>4499704
then you are unknowingly delivered from pain

>>4499711
I can't, but if you reply to this post, then clearly you had some reason not to kill yourself immediately.

>>4499716
>I can't

Exactly. And now that I have fulfilled my want for you to recognise your idiocy, I will commit suicide.

>>4499715
Then you experienced pleasure without a wish. If you want to say "you experienced pleasure as a deliverance from pain," then you are no longer arguing that satisfaction is an insufficient reward to the suffering caused by the search for satisfaction, and instead you are arguing for the "pendulum" model of the necessity of pain to set a baseline for pleasure.

>>4499595


your conception that such things can or should be 'weighed' against each other in a definite manner is the real problem (and never mind your conception of a necessary duality here to start with).

at root of all these 'rational' appeals to anti-natalism is seriously juvenile ideas of value.

>>4499719
But that was a trick. I "tricked" you into deciding that you would rather continue to exist so as to perform an action.

If you had died right then, then you would have died a little bit more satisfied than you would have if you had died 60 seconds earlier. So by continuing to live, you increased the net satisfaction of your life.

Hence I have proven by construction that it is possible to live happily for a finite amount of time.

>>4499723
he didn't write that, Schopenhauer did

>>4499727
ok, now prove the value in living happily for a finite amount of time

Whether or not there is actual value in existence, I can't understand it, and as such there may as well not be.

>>4499731
Why should there be value? Value is determined by how much an agent is willing to sacrifice for something. If you said "I am tired of my agency, I offer up my life for sale, as compensation for the net value of the experiences I would have had living out the rest of my life as a free person," we could bid on you as a slave, and I think you'd find that the market value of a human being is non-zero (and perhaps even quite high, depending on what we planned to do with you).

But of course the value we would agree on your life (by bidding at auction, let's say) might not mean anything to you. If you are unwilling to pay $500 for an ipad because you don't want one, then an ipad is not worth $500 to you.

>>4499736
it's weird tho how u and all these other nihilistic ass bros still stick around and live while these grand narrative shitheads like al-qaeda or imperialists n shit are ready to die and throw their life away for it. kind of paradoxical if u ax me.

>>4499728


then schoppy must have missed alot of points in his readings of eastern mysticism, and was still stuck in enlightenment modes of thought.

>>4499739
a human is only worth the value of their labor power comrade

>>4499742
You are intriguing. Please tell me your cultural and educational background.

>>4499742
I'm not nihilistic in the slightest. I'll act on my anti-natalism soon, I just need to ascertain a less painful method than those currently available to me.

Has anyone here slit their wrists before? How bad of a way to go out would it be?

>>4499743
elaboooooraaaateeeeeeeee

the car's on fire and there's no driver at the wheel
and the sewers are all muddied with a thousand lonely suicides
and a dark wind blows

the government is corrupt
and we're on so many drugs
with the radio on and the curtains drawn

we're trapped in the belly of this horrible machine
and the machine is bleeding to death

the sun has fallen down
and the billboards are all leering
and the flags are all dead at the top of their poles

it went like this:

the buildings tumbled in on themselves
mothers clutching babies picked through the rubble
and pulled out their hair

the skyline was beautiful on fire
all twisted metal stretching upwards
everything washed in a thin orange haze

i said: "kiss me, you're beautiful -
these are truly the last days"

you grabbed my hand and we fell into it
like a daydream or a fever

we woke up one morning and fell a little further down -
for sure it's the valley of death

i open up my wallet
and it's full of blood

>>4499720
Moreover, the business of biological life is a war of all against all filled with constant physical pain and distress, not merely unsatisfied desires. There is also the constant dread of death on the horizon to consider, which makes human life worse than animals. Reason only compounds our suffering by allowing us to realize that biology's agenda is not something we would have chosen had we been given a choice, but it is ultimately helpless to prevent us from serving it.

>>4499755

>>4499763
But surely the rational anti-natalist doesn't "dear" death? And doesn't feel anxiety over his inability to fulfill the expectations biology laid out for him?

So from what does he suffer? If he fears neither death nor failure nor the prospect of worse times (for he knows he has a perfect means of escape), then what does he have left to make him unhappy?

>>4499763
But surely the rational anti-natalist doesn't "fear" death? And doesn't feel anxiety over his inability to fulfill the expectations biology laid out for him?

So from what does he suffer? If he fears neither death nor failure nor the prospect of worse times (for he knows he has a perfect means of escape), then what does he have left to make him unhappy?

>>4498750
>>4498728
>>4498767
>>4498798


There is little in the present that I can learn through literature other then world news.
We must learn from the past and the wise words of men well before our time before the impurity of widespread pleasures.

>>4499773
The real question is, what does he have left to make him happy

In accordance with my conception of life, I have chosen not to bring children into the world. A coin is examined, and only after careful deliberation, given to a beggar, whereas a child is flung out into the cosmic brutality without hesitation

>>4498680
Really, no one comments on the Godspeed You! Black Emperor F#A# (infinity)?

Good post-rock choice, OP, hands down my favorite GSY!BE album.

>>4500010
see
>>4499756

>>4499756
Cringeworthy lyrics.

>>4500056
Cringeworthy opinion.

>>4500057
Really it is comparable to teenage girl poetry.

>>4500061
>being this pleb

besides it's not lyrics, and it's also made a lot better by the delivery. listen to the album

>>4500065

Not the other guy but

>the government is corrupt and we're on so many drugs

That's pretty funny. Like if some music executives or whatever were trying to cash in on that anti-establishment dollar.

>>4500114
To be fair, Godspeed You! Black Emperor is pretty anti-establishment.

>The group was once misconstrued as being a band of terrorists.[10][11] After stopping at a local gas station for fuel in the town of Ardmore, Oklahoma, during their 2003 tour of the United States, the station attendant working that day believed the group of Canadians to be terrorists. She quickly passed a note to another customer also getting fuel to call the police. When the local police appeared, the group was held until they could be questioned by the FBI. Although the police were suspicious of the band's anti-government documents and some photos they had (such as those of oil rigs), they found no incriminating evidence. After background checks were run, the ensemble was released from custody and continued on their way to their next show in Columbia, MO. Efrim Menuck later spoke to the crowd about what happened to them during their appearance in Missouri and speculated that their origin was a motive for being released quickly ("It's a good thing we're nice white kids from Canada"), hinting at racism in the police force.[12] The incident was mentioned in Michael Moore's book Dude, Where's My Country?

>In 2013 the band won the Polaris Music Prize, but they criticised the cost of the ceremony during the time of austerity, stating "maybe the next celebration should happen in a cruddier hall, without the corporate banners and culture overlord".[15]

>>4498680
No.

>>4498810
My life is awesome. Don't mistake your shitty life and internal sadness for profundity.

>>4500119

Please stop you're making it even worse.

They have "anti-governmennt documents" and someone in Ardmore, Oklahoma happened to called the cops on them...

And they criticized how much an awards show cost...

Well I'm not going to let you stop me from enjoying them but you're doing a good job.

>>4500125
lel, read the thread, you and your deluded brethren have been #rekt like 40 times

>>4500114
the band didn't write that poem

>>4500129
yeah lol

I think human consciousness is a tragic misstep in human evolution. We became too self aware, nature created an aspect of nature separate from itself. We are creatures that should not exist, by natural law. We are things that labor under the illusion of having a self, a secretion of sensory experience and feeling, programmed with total assurance that we are each somebody, when in fact everybody's nobody. I think the honorable thing for our species to do is deny our programming, stop reproducing, walk hand in hand into extinction, one last midnight, brothers and sisters opting out of a raw deal.

>>4500137
> We are creatures that should not exist, by natural law.

wut

>>4500128
Anti-establishment subject material is also a part of the "aesthetic" that goes into the whole act, from the band name to sleeve art and "lyrics".
Cringe all you want, that's your problem, not theirs for being what they are.

>>4500138
2deep4u?

>>4500129
Link some posts bubba

>>4500137

>>4500142
what 'natural law' are you referring to?

>>4500137
>We are creatures that should not exist, by natural law.

This idea is contradictory word salad

>>4500146
i fucking hate 4chan

>>4500137
>>4500137

Enjoying True Detective are we?

>>4500137
>cult leader fiction

>>4500151
it's the best show in decades. rust is one of the most magnetic characters to ever grace the screen

>>4500142
>implying meaningless concoctions of words are 'profound'

Anytime someone talks about a 'natural law', you know that's a retarded weak spot in their argument

>>4500147
The 'natural law' is 'lets assume a premise so I won't be wrong'

>>4500152
>good thing I'm a "real" individual and not part of some stupid thing bigger than myself!

>>4500149
I'm the one who posted that and I agree.
Did so just to draw attention to the fact where it's from and the typical reaction to it.

>>4500166
i used to laugh at the fedora meme (i feel deeply ashamed, don't worry) but now that it's applied to anything remotely out of norm it just makes me depressed. it's pretty much thinly veiled anti-intellectualism at this point

>>4500182
It's not funny because it mocks a real problem in society; ie socially stunted young men. But it's been used to the point of just being eye-rolling and aesthetically offensive.

>>4500182
fedora, edgy and pretentious all mean 'something i don't like or don't understand' now

>>4500125
>My life is awesome.
That's 100% irrelevant to the subject. One particular life has nothing to do with the total of life in general. Not everyone is a lucky motherfucker like you.

>You know, I wonder if they'll laugh when I am dead
>Why am I fighting to live, if I'm just living to fight
>Why am I trying to see, when there ain't nothing in sight
>Why am I trying to give, when no one gives me a try
>Why am I dying to live, if I'm just living to die

#swag

>>4498680
>Would you read a novel about an anti-natalistic anti-hero who goes around killing people to spare them the suffering of existence?
God no, sounds like shit already

>>4500358
Only one can't calculate total happiness, so antinatalism a kneejerk vague sentiment shit.

>>4500746
But they have a point on asserting that all the luxuries and commodities a minority of the human species have been able to achieve has been gained through death, hunger and suffering of the most. And it doesn't look like it's gonna change. Most of the human species has been living in shit conditions while a small percentage oppressed them since forever, and even in advanced societies like, the one we live in, there are still huge problems that make people extremely unhappy even though they don't suffer hunger, have ok health and are relatively safe.

>>4500780
It does look very much like it's going to change. It is changing as we speak. Constantly. Rapidly.

>>4500792
But it doesn't change the most being sacrificed for the benefit of a minority. And the difference between the richest and the poorest is increasing "as we speak", so no, I don't think this is gonna change.

>>4500820
It's not about the difference between the richest and the poorest, it's about if the poorest can live well. That is increasingly the case in many parts of the world. A contemporary Russian lives a lot better than a peasant in Tsarist times, for example.

>>4500835
>it's about if the poorest can live well.
When I say the poorest I talk about families living literally on garbage or disease-ridden niggers with more protein flying around them than inside their digestive system.

>>4500843
The majority of the people in the world don't live like that though. And it's not like those problems can't be solved. That's not a problem inherent to life, that's a problem of shitty living. Being antinatalist because of some African shitholes is like banning Kinder Eggs because retards eat toys.

>>4500835
Oh, btw, I forgot to add when you talk about those "many parts", you mean the ones that put wire fence or walls on their frontiers so those nasty poors come stink our beautiful streets and steal our jerbs, and when they find out some illegal immigrant came they put him on some immigration detention center where they treat him like a king (without rights, because rights are for legal citizens and he was breaking the law anyway) until they kick him out to his country.

>>4500849
>The majority of the people in the world don't live like that though.
Are you sure?
>And it's not like those problems can't be solved.
The problem isn't that we can't, the problem is that we aren't going to. Of course it's possible, but nobody really gives a fuck.
>That's not a problem inherent to life,
Nope, Only to our civilization.
>Being antinatalist because of some African shitholes is like banning Kinder Eggs because retards eat toys.
No. The point of my vision of antinatalism isn't because of the suffering of some poor motherfucker, it's because the logic behind the whole culture that works through every individual but no individual in particular can stop, is stupid, decadent and reduces what I believe to be the potential of the humans as species. And it's so well built that it won't collapse itself, as commies wrongly predicted, nor it will be destroyed externally, since there's no match to it. it's a matter of self-perpetuation of a logic, like a computer program that exists only on the relations between individuals and can only be possibly erased when like the 80% of the individuals have disappeared. Of course I don't want to MURDER most of the human race, but I think it would be nice if we just stopped populating this ill system until we know exactly how we are going to build a consistently efficient society.

>>4500857
Yes, things aren't perfect. Lets end everything forever because things aren't completely immaculate just now.

>>4500881
>Lets end everything forever
You should read the next post. And, anyway, if the menu of the day consists of shit forever, I think I prefer to starve to death. I'll keep my dignity, thanks.

>>4500875
>Are you sure?
Yes.
>The problem isn't that we can't, the problem is that we aren't going to. Of course it's possible, but nobody really gives a fuck.
Who wouldn't we? It's to everyone's benefit. Even the filthy rich prefer a happy consumer to a rowdy lumpenprole. And quality of life is improving nearly everywhere.
>Nope, Only to our civilization.
It can change just fine. It has before. The west is already in the transition to a consumption based economy rather than a labour based one, the rest of the world will follow.
>No. The point of my vision of antinatalism [...] individuals have disappeared.
So because you consider the betterment of society as it is currently impossible, you offer a solution that's impossible to implement? Doesn't seem very productive.
>Of course I don't want to MURDER most of the human race, but I think it would be nice if we just stopped populating this ill system until we know exactly how we are going to build a consistently efficient society.
Population control is wholly different from antinatalism. It's pruning a rose bush instead of pulling the roots out. Seems much more reasonable. Of course figuring out how society would work well before we get going is completely absurd. You can't pause life. Trial and error is the only way.

Antinatalism remains vain intellectual posturing though, since every sensible antinatalist knows that you can't talk the population of the world out of popping out babies every second. It's a completely impractical, hypothetical, overly drastic non-solution. If you want to diminish suffering, get to work on it in ways that will actually make a difference.

>>4501040
>Who wouldn't we?
You mean how? Because it's easier not to.
>It's to everyone's benefit.
lol no
>Even the filthy rich prefer a happy consumer to a rowdy lumpenprole.
Maybe on your city, but not in taiwan where they have their factories.
>And quality of life is improving nearly everywhere.
Nope. Only on rich countries (except Europe's PIGS, of course). Developing countries have the higher number of slum dwellers, and underdeveloped countries have wars (necessary for our countries to sell weapons) and shitty living conditions (necessary for our economic oligarchy to have cheap workforce and no taxes).
>It can change just fine. It has before.
Yes, but a change doesn't imply an improvement.
>The west is already in the transition to a consumption based economy rather than a labour based one,
Yes, we mostly work on the tertiary sector. Why? Because the producers are on poorer countries, that's why.
>the rest of the world will follow.
Yeah and then we'll all by happy and the products will fall from the sky since nobody will have to work on a factory.
>So because you consider the betterment of society as it is currently impossible, you offer a solution that's impossible to implement? Doesn't seem very productive.
I don't offer anything. The fact is I think humanity is beyond salvation. But I do what I find morally right because I have a sense of dignity, that's what I have a rational justification for. It's not impossible to implement, it's as impossible to implement as world hunger is impossible to be solved. I know nobody gives a fuck about my opinion and never will, I'm pretty aware of it.
>Population control is wholly different from antinatalism. It's pruning a rose bush instead of pulling the roots out.
To stop the infection ones is preferred to the other. But as I said, if the menu of the day is shit, I'll prefer to pass.
>Seems much more reasonable.
It's less radical, but more ambitious.
>Of course figuring out how society would work well before we get going is completely absurd. You can't pause life. Trial and error is the only way.
It's not a matter of pause: it's a matter of making the system collapse AND making it easier to organize society. The more individuals the higher the entropy. Tribes have a pretty good organization of life and work, and most of them have pretty happy lives. It would be great if we could live like them but keeping our knowledge about science and technology we have today.
>Antinatalism remains vain intellectual posturing though, since every sensible antinatalist knows that you can't talk the population of the world out of popping out babies every second.
This applies to EVERY political/ethical theory that's not perfectly ok with everything thats happening in the world right now.
>It's a completely impractical
See above
>1/2

2/2
>>4501040
>hypothetical
Explain me why. Then explain me why that doesn't apply to contrary theories.
>overly drastic
Anything that can work is overly drastic. The only non-overly drastic solution is being a conformist.
>non-solution.
Yeah, well, you know, that's just like, your baseless opinion, man.
>If you want to diminish suffering, get to work on it in ways that will actually make a difference.
I don't want to diminish suffering as suffering is the most inherent part oh life. I just hate the logic behind the global system because I think it's an attack to my own personal dignity: it made me an enemy, so I must treat it like my enemy. The problem is that I'm not strong enough to destroy it by myself and that I'm not willing to kill people if I'm not totally forced to.

>>4498680
Chances are that it would be an Edgefest 2000, so probably not.

>>4501130
>>4501146
All economic problems you mention can be solved by automatisation. As for antinatalism, it simply can't be implemented. That's what makes it merely empty posturing.

Another thing to note is that the sort of 'muh suffering' antinatalism is a form of utilitarianism and susceptible to all the same criticisms.

>>4501197
>All economic problems you mention can be solved by automatisation.
That's what Marx said like 150 years ago. Industrialization by capitalism would lead to automatisation and communism. He wasn't *that* right, though.
I didn't say we can't (automatisation might be possible, indeed), I said we aren't going to, we aren't willing to. Things are ok as they are for the most powerful portion of society and they are going to do nothing to change it. It's naive to expect otherwise.
>As for antinatalism, it simply can't be implemented. That's what makes it merely empty posturing.
Well, give me one example of a theory that might change things and can be implemented. I'm all ears. So far shit didn't work. Neoliberalism with all its implications rules, and looks like a bright, long future awaits it.
>Another thing to note is that the sort of 'muh suffering' antinatalism is a form of utilitarianism and susceptible to all the same criticisms.
Well, agreed. I personally detest utilitarianism. This is why I tend to separate my version of antinatalism from the "muh suffering" one.

>>4501146
>I'm the same fag
Btw, by "hypothetical" I read "hypocritical", so ignore that part. My bad.

>>4498680
Honestly mate, yeah I'd read it. You'd have to be careful not to make it edgy, but I think it's a really good concept. Also think it would interest publishers.

>>4501224
>hat's what Marx said like 150 years ago. Industrialization by capitalism would lead to automatisation and communism. He wasn't *that* right, though.
>I didn't say we can't (automatisation might be possible, indeed), I said we aren't going to, we aren't willing to. Things are ok as they are for the most powerful portion of society and they are going to do nothing to change it. It's naive to expect otherwise.
Things are okay for the powerful until another way of doing things makes them more money. Just like how tractors were better than ox plows. There's nothing naive about expecting automatisation. Industrialisation by capitalism is actually leading to automatisation and if not communism, at least some form of welfare state.

>Well, give me one example of a theory that might change things and can be implemented. I'm all ears. So far shit didn't work. Neoliberalism with all its implications rules, and looks like a bright, long future awaits it.
I honestly couldn't, I don't share your moral indignation so I see nothing to fix. I like how things are going now and I like the way I think they're going. Antinatalism, to me, is a solution to a problem that I don't recognise in the first place.

>Well, agreed. I personally detest utilitarianism. This is why I tend to separate my version of antinatalism from the "muh suffering" one.
Why would you be in favour of the extinction of humanity then?

>>4501289
>Things are okay for the powerful until another way of doing things makes them more money.
Yes. And so far I don't think automatisation can be cheaper than getting people with no rights to work.
>I don't share your moral indignation
I understand your perspective but the word "indignation"... it somehow offends me. I prefer to call it loath or hate. There's something in indignation I instinctively see as weak, like the kind of sentiment you see in people who believe they're rightful. It's just disgusting.
>Why would you be in favour of the extinction of humanity then?
Well, it's not Humanity itself what I want extinct. That would be like a extreme measure, but I would be ok with it as a last option. What I don't like is this civilization with the economic, political, cultural, educational and value systems it implies.

>>4498680
The problem is, the suffering this anti-hero would cause to the friends and family of his victims might outweigh any suffering that person was going to experience if they hadn't been killed.

>>4501424
That's a good point. Even if you consider that life is suffering and that suffering is bad, your compassion cannot possibly lead to killing anyone.

>>4501169
fuck off to /b/ with those buzzwords you giant pleb

>>4501424
what if he kills all the relatives and friends too

>>4501512
They also have relatives and friends, as do they, and so on. He'd have to kill the entire human race.

>>4501518
indeed.

>>4501518
exactly. finally we will have an anti-natalist who isn't just posturing

>>4499751
pls respond. i cant get a gun where i live

>>4500182
but isn't that specific quote from the show the very example of pseudo intellectualism (if not anti) wrapped up in silly witticisms? i've tried reading pizolatto's galveston novel, he's a puzzo-level writer but at least coppola didn't exactly insert his ramblings into movie, or showed them so explicitly on screen.

>>4501518
ft. Nick Cage.

I'm down.

>>4501548
Do you live on the moon m8? Guns are everywhere.

this has been proven time in again: it's all in the writing. Lolita should a repugnant story, but it's not, because N pulls it off. He deflects everything through irony; if you tried this without a sense of humor, you would be direly fucked

>>4501556
austraaaaalia M88888

>>4501561
Australia has guns as well, cuntm8.

>>4498728
gay marriage
declining birth rates
etc

>>4501579
>gays getting a piece of paper
>antinatalism

trap rap, m8

>>4498680

Shit be whack bro. Like Drake pumping the sound-system in a discotheque.

You've missed the frankfurt school b a few years

>>4501567
i have never seen a gun and there's no way i could get one. maybe i should suicide by cop, dey got gunzzz

>>4501508
Just because a word is often used by people who don't understand it doesn't mean the word itself has lost its meaning among people who actual know the definition of said word.
Seriously, how could you make this a good novel without getting into edgy territory?
Anti-natalism itself is extremely hard to argue for on a sympathetic level and so is murder for the mere sake of killing people.

>>4501610
only if you're dumb tho

>>4501579
Maybe unemployment, shit-jobs, a dark future, alienation and a consumerist society that won't give proper education to the children instead of turning them into obedient and greedy sheeple has something to do with it. Also, buttsex outside of marriage wasn't going to get anybody pregnant (as far as I'm concerned).

>>4501610
>Anti-natalism itself is extremely hard to argue for on a sympathetic level
I thought we were doing pretty good a few posts ago.
And comparing it to murder... just lol

>>4501662
I wasn't talking about natalism equaling murder, I was talking about OP's idea for a novel.

>>4501662
>I thought we were doing pretty good a few posts ago.
No, not really. Muh suffering is existent, yes, but it does not have to be permanent and don't you dare to come with the ordinary trials of life now.

>>4501697
I thought that part was already solved more than literally five posts ago. Check the long-ass comments.
I don't think any anti-natalist is going to tell you if you're happy or not or if your happiness is worth it or not. It's not a matter of convincing you that your specific, particular life is shit. This is the part apparently nobody wants to understand.

>>4501593
You should associate with the criminal element, they have guns.

>>4501734
Sorry, I stopped shortly above them.
But I guess the reason why it is quite hard to understand anti-natalists is that a lot of people are convinced that happiness outweighs the shitty parts and anti-natalism couldn't be used as an generalisable maxime that could work as as a global law, at least as far as I see it.

>>4501697
All satisfaction, or what is commonly called happiness, is really and essentially always negative only, and never positive. It is not a gratification which comes to us originally and of itself, but it must always be the satisfaction of a wish. For desire, that is to say, want [or will], is the precedent condition of every pleasure; but with the satisfaction, the desire and therefore the pleasure cease; and so the satisfaction or gratification can never be more than deliverance from a pain, from a want.

Even the moments of satisfaction, when repeated often enough, only lead to boredom and thus human existence is constantly swinging "like a pendulum to and fro between pain and boredom, and these two are in fact its ultimate constituents". This ironic cycle eventually allows us to see the inherent vanity at the truth of existence and to realize that the purpose of our existence is not to be happy.

Life goes hard though, people who want to get off the ride can get off.

>>4501748
>anti-natalism couldn't be used as an generalisable maxime that could work as as a global law
Well, at first anti-natalism as a perspective pretends to give reasons as to justify itself when someone is questioning its validity in universal terms. But it's pretty pointless to go trying to convince people about life being good or not, nobody should expect to do it seriously and get any positive result.
The point of anti-natalism, as I understand it, is something you can take as a perspective because of your own motives. And I have my arguments when you ask me why I believe what I believe. But it's obviously absurd to go convincing you about something that contradicts your most basic intuitions without a very, VERY good argument that shakes your most fundamental beliefs, which is not the case.