Philosophical debate

[Anonymous No.10466641]

I am an antinatalist and recently have been trying to broach this with my family. The issue is that my 21 year old sister is heavily pregnant with her fucking THIRD child (she is a whore) so naturally my family is very reactive to my views. They have been making snarky jibes at me whenever I mention antinatalism around them.

How do I explain my views without coming across as arrogant? I have tried everything. for example I sent my sister an excel spreadsheet comparing her babies potential pleasure within the first 20 minutes of life with its potential suffering. For example I explain in the document that her baby could potentially of course gain pleasure from its first ever burp but could also gain pain from accidentally burping up its own stomach juices due to a rupture in the belly from birth defects, as well as other things. She was enraged like the bitch she is. I have also tried to demonstrate that she is immoral for bringing babies into the world, and even if she wasn't a bad mother to her current children and wasn't poor and single, her childrens suffering would still not be worth it.

I have tried giving David Benatars example of being in a theatre for a bad show that you wouldn't get up to leave but that you regret going to to demonstrate the folly of my fathers 'why don't you just kill yourself' defence and he didn't understand. He told me 'if you were at the theatre next to me I would get up and leave faggot'.

I don't want to ruin my familial relationship but don't want to bend to their idiotic views. My mother and father have already told me that if antinatalism only related to my birth they would support it but they are just petty because they are losing. It is funny because I am a 29 year old NEET and bring nothing but suffering to them yet they claim new life is worth it?

[Anonymous No.10466702]

Pic is the spreadsheet I provided her with

[Anonymous No.10466714]

Honestly man antinatalism is inherently arrogant. What are you gonna think you can shake your hand at human nature and proliferation? Why would you even bring that up in regular conversation you weirdo?

[Anonymous No.10466719]

Your sister is fecund and very successful. You live in an autistic bubble. Your parents are thankful that their daughter had children, more than enough to replace them already, because they clearly cannot rely on you to do so.

Your family is clearly embarrassed by you.

[Anonymous No.10466724]

>>10466641
you are arguing with 300 million years of evolutionary apery don't be surprised when the mob doesn't respond well

[Anonymous No.10466726]

>>10466666

[Anonymous No.10466747]

>>10466641
>>10466702
You're a huge fucking autist. I feel bad for your family.

[Anonymous No.10466772]

All the other anons made good points. So, I'm just going to say, the fact that you can here of all places for a personal army request to help argue your shit philosophy for you to people who are far more well off than you shows you still have a lot of growing up to do at the age of 29.

[Anonymous No.10466786]

>>10466719
this unfortunately

[Anonymous No.10466791]

your mental age seems to be 15-16. u discovered how to be an emo.

[Anonymous No.10466793]

>>10466641
Your views are idiotic. You are the idiot for trying to convince others of anything.

[Anonymous No.10466835]

Let them suffer. No one will understand. They aren't ready.

[Anonymous No.10466837]

>>10466641
The best thing to do is to somehow convince her to get an abortion. You may need to buy her a few books/pamphlets on the topic before she understands

[Anonymous No.10466890]

>>10466641
Really hope this is bait.
If not, you're aware that you're on the spectrum, right? Even if the issue wasn't something as edgy as antinatalism, spending this much energy arguing with your family and sending them spreadsheets to read is just cringey, self-important behavior

[Anonymous No.10466904]

Good for you. However, this looks like a losing battle; I'd say it's a better use of your time to tell others about antinatalism rather than putting all your effort into convincing just a few people that already won't listen...

[Anonymous No.10466915]

>>10466641
>antinatalist

Why haven't you killed yourself?

>inb4 I can solve more suffering if alive

And thats the argument everyone else has. You're prolonging or creating suffering because it might turn out better in the end.

[Anonymous No.10466923]

>>10466915
>hur hur muh epicurean retort.
There's a difference between starting a life and continuing a life. Antinatalism does not entail pro-mortalism.

[Anonymous No.10466952]

your view is wrong because there is no basis for preferring pleasure over pain

[Anonymous No.10466956]

>>10466923
>Antinatalism does not entail pro-mortalism.
It damn well should, for all its adepts.

[Anonymous No.10466961]

>>10466641
10/10. This is how it's done, kids.

[Anonymous No.10466988]

>>10466956
How can you spread anti-natalism if you're dead? You clearly don't understand the philosophy, it's not pro-death, just anti-natality.

[Anonymous No.10466992]

>>10466952
Do you actively seek out and enjoy being in pain? What would you say to someone who had chronic physical pain?

[Anonymous No.10467006]

In every man sleeps a prophet and when he wakes there is a little more evil in the world.
The compulsion to preach is so rooted in us that it emerges from depths unknown tothe instinct for self-preservation. Each of us awaits his moment in order to propose something - anything. He has a voice: that is enough. It costs us ear to be neither deaf nor dumb.
From snobs to scavengers, all expend their criminal generosity, all hand out their formulas for happiness, all try to give directions: life in common thereby becomes intolerable, and life with oneself still more so; if you fail to meddle in other people's business you are so uneasy about your own that you convert your 'self' into a religion, or, apostle in reverse, you deny it altogehter; we are the victims of the universal game...
The abundance of solutions to the aspects of existence is equaled only by their futility. History: a factory of ideals... lunatic mythology, frenzy of hordes and of solitaries... refusal to look reality in the face, mortal thirst for fictions...
- Emil Cioran

[Anonymous No.10467036]

>>10466992
what you're doing now is equivalent to asking why the antinatalist hasn't killed himself. continuing life is different than starting a life just like how the tendencies of what humans do is different than those tendencies having a firm basis. If an antinatalist kills himself that isn't a refutation of his point that starting a life is bad. Likewise, in my case seeking pleasure and avoiding pain is not a refutation of my point that there is no basis for preferring pleasure over pain.

[Anonymous No.10467037]

>>10467036
>If an antinatalist kills himself that isn't a refutation of his point that starting a life is bad
meant to say doesn't kill himself*

[Anonymous No.10467047]

>>10467036
Pleasure is pleasurable and pain is painful. That's the basis for preferring pleasure.

[Anonymous No.10467051]

>>10467047
No it isn't. We agree that almost all humans prefer feeling pleasure over feeling pain. But pointing out that is the case doesn't provide an argument for why it is right for us to prefer pleasure over pain.

[Anonymous No.10467053]

Haha I love the "idiotic mother drops baby on head" and "father leaves before birth AGAIN"

But omg why does she think I'm attackng her?? This is a joke or no?

[Anonymous No.10467068]

>>10467051
Yeah it is. You'll die if you suffer too much pain. The basis for preferring pleasure is in the definition of the word itself.

[Anonymous No.10467083]

>>10466641
If you're an antinatalist just don't have any kids. You're not bending to their will, you're asking them to bend to yours jesus christ and look at that list lmao

[Anonymous No.10467086]

>>10467068
>The basis for preferring pleasure is in the definition of the word itself.
Nothing you have said shows this to be true. My position is that moral terms can't be naturalized into terms such as pleasure and pain. It seems like you consider the statement that pleasure is good to be analytically true. But you never once tried to support that view. By saying that we die if we suffer too much that doesn't support your view. All that statement does is tell me your position again, that pain is bad.

[Anonymous No.10467088]

>>10467083
if you're an antinatalist not only don't have kids, kill yourself.

antinatalism is fedora-tier teen angst philosophy. it's negative utilitarianism--as if utilitarianism wasn't lame enough

[Anonymous No.10467093]

>>10466702
This is the most autistic thing I've ever seen.
I can't believe you sent that to your sister.

[Anonymous No.10467095]

There is nothing innately terrible about life. Antinatalism is just autistic pessimism.

[Anonymous No.10467101]

>>10466702
Probability problems aside, some of this shit...
>birth video leaked to porn site
>humiliating lifetime for baby

[Anonymous No.10467116]

Wew lad

[Anonymous No.10467121]

>>10467086
Oh look another fucking autist why do you dumbasses not know when to leave the armchair

[Anonymous No.10467122]

>>10466641
Antinatalism is the retarded offspring of nihilism. Your opinions are wrong, and it's pretty obvious they come from resentment of your sisters whorishness. Reevaluate your opinion from a non bias place.

[Anonymous No.10467124]

>>10466641
Why hasn't OP killed himself yet?

[Anonymous No.10467132]

OP be nice to your whore sister, she will have to pay for it in about 5 or 10 years when she has 3+ screaming kids tying her ambitions down for the rest of her life

[Anonymous No.10467133]

why are so many people opposed to arguing about morality and value judgements? You don't have to take everything so person or be so surprised that people disagree with you about things you never actually thought about.

[Anonymous No.10467136]

>>10467133
>person
personal

[Anonymous No.10467138]

>>10467133
He doesn't want to have a debate he just wants them to do what he wants.

[Anonymous No.10467151]

I was thinking bait until I saw that spreadsheet. Wtf is wrong with you

[Anonymous No.10467179]

>>10467122
How does antinatalism follow from nihilism? Besides being edgy, they don't really have a correlation. Nihilism advocates the absolute absence of any sort of meaning or purpose. Antinatalism on the other hand argues using utilitairianism and concludes that the sufffering in a human life is greater than the pleasure and so on. Which is a value judgement. So it's actually impossible to sincerely hold both stances at the same time.

[Anonymous No.10467192]

If one is to be consequent in their antinatalism, one must also reject wholeheartedly all versions of the pleasure principle. Pleasure as necessarily good/suffering as necessarily bad are some among many intuitions upon which the synthesis between moral conviction and ethical theory is based. Antinatalism stands against this synthesis, against intuitivism, and finally against the foremost intuition of philosophy- that children must be born.

[Anonymous No.10467203]

>>10466641
Instead of autistic spreadsheets why not introduce the actual source material? Hell, even just showing how antinatalism is the best canditate for theory X in population ethics would suffice. If they're too stupid to get it then there's nothing you can do.

[Anonymous No.10467448]

>>10467192
The nature of suffering is an essential part of anti-natalist philosophy

[Anonymous No.10467984]

Your family is probably illiterate and not prone to logic or reason. You sound like a retard too.
Your family is doomed, your nephews will be miserable and your parents will die ashamed of your existence.
Good luck.

[Anonymous No.10467995]

>>10466702
>baby shaken by uncle
>baby crushed by uncle

[Anonymous No.10468004]

fantastic thread OP 10/10

[Anonymous No.10468006]

>>10466714
What an awful post.

[Anonymous No.10468016]

>>10466702
so THIS... is the power... of antinatalism... WOAH...

[Anonymous No.10468039]

>>10466702

lol. good stuff OP.

[Anonymous No.10468075]

>>10466641
if you were a real antinatalist you would have committed an hero by now

[Old Ritualists No.10468083]

>>10466641
Maybe if you had a kid, you'd see that all your rationalizing was stupid and that it was worth it.

[Anonymous No.10468088]

>>10466641
>>10466702
Unironically the best copypasta of 2017.

[Anonymous No.10468098]

>>10467124
Probably because he's a biological organism with an irrational aversion to self-harm that exists at an instinctual level. Like everyone else until life gets so bad that even this basic instinct is overpowered. Recognizing antinatalism as correct isn't something that causes you pain or suffering, it's just an abstract, intellectual stance. It wouldn't make any sense to expect this stance to lead to an increased chance of suicide unless you mistakenly believe people "decide" to live or not live based on pure reason.
>>10466641
Use the asymmetry of pleasure and pain argument, OP.
Most people would agree it's good to put to sleep a dog suffering with cancer. This demonstrates a general collective recognition that eliminating suffering is a good thing. Even people who are opposed to euthanasia for humans generally recognize *why* others would find value in it, it's just that they personally believe the good of suffering ended is outweighed by the bad of violating the sanctity of life (e.g. one anti-euthanasia argument I've seen is by making it an option you're communicating that sick or elderly people are an unwanted burden and devaluing their existence).
Most people would agree it's not bad to refrain from creating a life capable of pleasure. This point might sound debatable at first, but I don't think anyone stays up all night stressed out over all the new lives they're neglecting to create. If you don't create a life it's a total non-issue, not only does nobody exist to suffer from this absence of life, but further no sense of missing out on pleasure exists to make the removal of future pleasure bad. You only want pleasure in the first place if you're already alive, making the argument that life is good for creating the capacity for pleasure as faulty as an argument that getting someone addicted to heroin is good for creating the capacity for relieving heroin withdrawal.
And that's the crux of why the two are asymmetrical. It's easy to argue ending suffering like with euthanasia for a dog spending all his time writhing in pain is a good thing, and it's easy to argue any given moment you spend not creating a new life and thereby not creating a new capacity for wanting pleasure isn't a bad thing (it's neither good nor bad, just neutral). We tend to assume the two would be equal opposites because of some imagined sense of parity / justice, but really pleasure is a deceptive relief of a sense of lacking, not some opposite good force balancing out suffering. The whole scheme of wanting plays into suffering rather than opposing it.

[Anonymous No.10468103]

>>10466702
I would have given a serious response if I didn't take a moment to read this first

[Anonymous No.10468117]

>>10468075
Nobody refrains from suicide for consciously thought out reasons.
It's an instinct not to harm yourself, and impressive that so many people eventually do harm and kill themselves in spite of that instinct. But I very much doubt the people who commit suicide each year arrived at that act through some sort of logical philosophical stance. That's not how people work.

[Old Ritualists No.10468123]

>>10467121
Not him, but pain also informs us of how much damage we've taken and the strong impact it has on us causes us to learn quickly. It's not just bad, it's necessary for mortal creatures.

[Old Ritualists No.10468132]

>>10467132
What higher ambition can you have than kids, unless you're some kind of genius?

[Old Ritualists No.10468145]

>>10468117
How do you know that people who commit suicide didn't do it for rational reasons? You can set up a few presuppositions to get you there rationally.

[Anonymous No.10468146]

>>10468132
You don't need to be a genius to dedicate yourself to a craft, which would be a higher ambition than spawning brood.

[Anonymous No.10468159]

>>10468146
I think you're underestimating raising children anon. It's hard for sure, but also wonderful and more fulfilling than trying to move up in a career for most people. Why do you have such a negative view of children?

[Anonymous No.10468174]

>>10466702
>baby born black (not shocking)
>baby crushed by uncle
>birth video leaked to porn website

[Anonymous No.10468182]

>>10466702
We have reached peak autism

[Anonymous No.10468197]

>>10468145
I'm not making an argument that this is definitely the case every single time with 0% uncertainty and can't be proven wrong given enough time and sophistry. I'm honestly surprised anyone would seriously argue people kill themselves for consciously determined rational conclusions (a lot of people *implicitly* assume this, but not many people explicitly argue it).
But to give you a specific reason for why you might believe this to be true if you're skeptical, I'd point to the same set of circumstances which brought this topic up in the first place: people rhetorically asking why an antinatalist doesn't just kill themselves.
And the fact most of the people who hold on an abstract level that life isn't worth living don't kill themselves is explained very neatly with the reminder that we all possess a powerful instinctual aversion to self-harm. And no matter what we might recognize in terms of reason, this aversion exists prior to reason.
As for why anyone still commits suicide then, it's not in my opinion that they've thought their way through overpowering this aversion, but rather that one or more equally instinctual / irrational feelings have worked them over to this course of action.
David Foster Wallace explained this phenomenon in terms of an analogy with people jumping out of a tall burning building. He pointed out that these people aren't any less averse to the negative feelings associated with falling to your death but instead that the fire becomes an even more powerful negative motivator.
I'd also point out there would probably be a lot more suicides if merely coming up with a logical understanding that life isn't worth living were enough to motivate you to end your life. There are a lot more people alive today who would agree to life not being worth living than there are people who've killed themselves this past year. Just reaching that intellectual conclusion isn't in itself a motivating force greater than the instinct against self-harm. Even in the successfully suicidal who do cite an intellectual reason for killing themselves, I would argue something was off with them at a biological level for them to be able to casually override the anti- self harm instinct (if they actually did just kill themselves after coming to an intellectual conclusion and had no discomfort / suffering / anxiety motivating them otherwise), like a variation on those kids born without the ability to feel pain who accidentally bite through their tongues or destroy an eyeball from lack of noxious instincts giving them a sense of boundaries for what they should or shouldn't do with their bodies.

[Anonymous No.10468218]

>>10468159
Insects lay eggs too. Reproducing is on par with molting or digestion as far as "highness" of ambitions go. At least if you're like Jiro and dedicate your life to making $300 fish and rice balls you're pursuing an ideal, like approaching the perfect Form of sushi as the prototypical basis for all lesser imperfect instances of real world sushi that participate in it.

[Anonymous No.10468220]

>>10466641
Antinatalism is autism.

[Anonymous No.10468221]

>>10468197
What I was trying to get at is that people who commit suicide (or everyone) are rationally thinking, but their presuppositions are emotionally / experientially founded. You can probably rationally get to suicide with certain assumptions about life.

[Anonymous No.10468225]

>>10468218
Reminder Jiro has a son.

[Anonymous No.10468227]

>>10468220
Epic, got 'em :DD

[Anonymous No.10468229]

>>10466641
I've already seen this post a month ago

[Anonymous No.10468232]

>>10468227
It's true and deep down you know it.

[Anonymous No.10468238]

>>10468225
Completely irrelevant since I never said not to have children, I only defended the claim dedicating yourself to a craft was a "higher ambition" than having children.

[Anonymous No.10468239]

>>10468218
You can argue these things through, but experience speaks differently anon. I have a niece and a nephew, and although they are certainly a handful at times, they are an immense joy. Nearly everything they do is cute beyond belief and it's a relationship that I can shape and foster. A relationship with a child is likely to be more satisfying to most people than just pursuing their career.

[Anonymous No.10468240]

>>10468229
It's not on the archive

[Anonymous No.10468243]

>>10468232
Not really

[Anonymous No.10468248]

>>10468232
You're wrong, and deep down you know it.

[Anonymous No.10468252]

>>10466641
>>10466702
This is the perfect end to the year. Thanks OP

[Anonymous No.10468254]

>>10468239
Whether they're a handful or not has nothing to do with this topic. Having children can be the easiest thing in the world or the hardest thing and it wouldn't change the point that dedicating yourself to a craft is a "higher ambition" than having children (using quotes because I didn't come up with that phrase myself and am not sure I would phrase it that way personally, but I don't have any alternative phrasings in mind right now to substitute for it).

[Anonymous No.10468262]

>>10468239
>>10468254
Also I don't know that I agree with your use of the word "career."
A craft isn't necessarily a career. You can make a living off of a craft, but the financial logistics / profitability of using the craft in that way aren't the same thing as the craft itself.

[Anonymous No.10468272]

>>10466641
>>10466702
PASTA
A
S
T
A

[Anonymous No.10468274]

>>10466641
posts like this make me realise im probably not as autistic as i think

[Anonymous No.10468285]

>>10468254
>>10468262
You related having children to insects laying eggs, which is clearly wrong, and then stated that a craft was better than doing that. If have children wasn't more fulfilling than pursuing a craft why would people sacrifice their work to have and raise kids? I don't buy that biology is solely at work, since humans can go against their biology.

[Anonymous No.10468302]

Why don't antinatalists bomb maternity wards? Surely it'll lead to the most beneficial outcome for us all.

[Anonymous No.10468314]

>>10468240
idc ive seen this "beta antinatalist tries to convince family for some fucking reason" bullshit

[Anonymous No.10468320]

>>10468302
Why do natalists constantly make these silly arguments?

[Anonymous No.10468322]

>>10468320
It is the most effective way of spreading antinatalism, right? Just to kill the babies as they're born.

[Anonymous No.10468367]

>>10468285
>You related having children to insects laying eggs, which is clearly wrong
How is that wrong? That's not even really an analogy, it's just an actual equivalent process. Insects literally do reproduce just like people do, does it "not count" because you don't like insects?
>I don't buy that biology is solely at work, since humans can go against their biology.
It depends on what you mean exactly by "go against their biology."
Can an injured person force themselves to sit still in a way that an injured horse couldn't?
Sure, that's a distinct advantage to dealing with human patients instead of non-human animal patients.
But can a normally functioning person casually slice off each of their fingers with a paper cutter?
Probably not.
Other things people do on a regular basis almost certainly more because of biology than out of some non-biological preference would be eating food, drinking, taking shits, sleeping, and having sex. You have some degree of wiggle room outside of how a non-human animal would approach these activities e.g. you can plan in advance to have a certain kind of food available in your refrigerator for meals next week and you can use contraceptives to have sex for pleasure minus functionality, but in broad strokes biology isn't anywhere close to negligible in our lives.
You cannot honestly believe the majority of parents consciously decided to have children for non-biological reasons. That is a completely ridiculous premise. Reproduction is a pretty fucking old biological process, and I'm pretty sure the reason people have children with a similar enough frequency to other non-human apes having children is way, way, way more because of biology than any other factor.

[Anonymous No.10468401]

>>10468322
>most effective
Nope. You could, through non-violent means and 100% within the realm of real world possibility, work towards large populations being sterilized e.g. many prisons practice sterilization or at least offer it in exchange for reduced sentencing, and Israel sterilized a large number of Africans as part of their immigration process.
If you could successfully persuade the right state authorities, you could even reach a point where it becomes a legal course of action to add sterilants to staple foods and the water supply of third world countries, preventing billions of unfortunate lives within as little time as a single human lifespan (and far more than that if you start counting all the offspring of the offspring of the offspring etc. that you prevented).
Meanwhile bombing a maternity ward would get you what, 100 lives prevented tops? And it wouldn't even count as prevention since they will already be alive at that point, so you'll be creating (a brief, but real) suffering for those infants before they die.

[Anonymous No.10469474]

>>10468401
And if you can't convince anyone? What if they see you as a raving lunatic? What then?

[Anonymous No.10469536]

>>10466772
People on /lit/ are probably much more intelligent and successfull than op's sheltered white trash family tho desu

[Anonymous No.10469618]

>>10469474
I'm pretty sure you have a much greater risk of being seen as mentally ill if you try to go through with your plan of bombing a maternity ward.

[Anonymous No.10469678]

>>10469474
>>10469618
Also there's a precedent for sterilization as an acceptable measure. People might find it objectionable, but I don't think it would qualify as evidence of mental illness merely to bring up sterilization as a topic. Obama's science adviser at least considered the logistics of adding sterilants to staple foods and water (though he didn't explicitly advocate for doing so).
https://ia601506.us.archive.org/2/items/Ecoscience_17/JohnHoldren-Ecoscience.pdf
>Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock.
And of course Israel just blatantly sterilized all its African immigrants lol:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/eliseknutsen/2013/01/28/israel-foribly-injected-african-immigrant-women-with-birth-control/
>In the past decade, the birth rate among Ethiopian-Israelis has declined by at least 20 percent. Advocacy groups now claim this decline is the result of a birth control regimen forced upon Ethiopian immigrant women.
And prisons have a long history of sterilizing convicts, often without consent:
http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/blog/unwanted-sterilization-and-eugenics-programs-in-the-united-states/
Still happens into the present day too:
https://www.rt.com/usa/167660-california-illegal-sterilization-women/
>Four California prisons illegally sterilized 39 women over a six-year period, a damning new report by the California State Auditor reveals.
>Of the 144 inmates who underwent bilateral tubal ligations, commonly referred to as having your tubes tied, from fiscal years 2005-06 to 2012-13, auditors found nearly one-third were performed without lawful consent.

[Anonymous No.10469693]

>>10466641
Antinatalism is false

[Anonymous No.10469706]

>>10469693
If it were "false" euthanasia and contraceptives wouldn't exist.

[Anonymous No.10469722]

>>10469706
There's a difference between not wanting a child under specific circumstances and not wanting any children ever.
Contraceptives are so you don't get AIDs you retard.

[Anonymous No.10469723]

>>10469706
There is a huge difference between "some lives should not be" and "no lives should be".

[Anonymous No.10469742]

>>10469722
>>10469723
If there are circumstances where euthanasia makes sense, then there's an argument for extending that reasoning to antinatalism.
It comes down to what you think you're gaining by not preventing new lives from coming into existence in the first place, or what you think you'd be losing by preventing them. But most antinatalist writers use the acceptance of euthanasia as a reasonable solution as a starting point.

[Anonymous No.10470036]

>>10466702
>father leaves before birth again
T O O G O O D
O
O

G
O
O
D

[Anonymous No.10470039]

>>10466915
>Why haven't you killed yourself?

Because some fuckers like you are still alive, can't leave until the job is done my friend.

>And thats the argument everyone else has.
Does it make it less compelling ?

>You're prolonging or creating suffering because it might turn out better in the end.

As a matter of fact, demographic explosion and its consequences isn't something I can solve or help solving if I am dead.

By the way I'm too good for you, you already demonstrated all your stupidity with your pathetic """"""rhetoric"""""" but I still answered to you. Looks like I'm the stupid one :^)

[Anonymous No.10470095]

>>10466747
>I feel bad for your family
>his existence is their fault

[Anonymous No.10470111]

>>10466915
>why haven't you killed yourself

Because I'm in no hurry to reincarnate in some incomprehensibly bad place.

[Anonymous No.10470119]

>>10468314
yeah i found it on /his/ from the 8th

[Anonymous No.10470135]

>>10468220
Woaw, great argumentation there anon :^)

[Anonymous No.10470148]

>>10468232
>Saying OP is an autist instead of opposing arguments to OP's stance
>Someone points his lack of maturity
>"It's true and deep down you know it."

Well buddy, I don't want children and you didn't give me anything to think otherwise. Because you are simply pathetic.

[Anonymous No.10470157]

[Anonymous No.10470180]

>>10470157
Ironically the unedited version of that image is a perfect microcosm for the sheer futility of the human condition. The attire and weapons change but everyone is still doing the same bullshit ad nauseum. And have we really accomplished anything? No matter how many diseases we cure or how many conveniences we create through technology , ingrates just keep whining about increasingly trivial bullshit.

[Anonymous No.10470195]

>>10468006
>What an awful post.
Is it, though? Consider that you are only concerned about the birth because you have direct exposure and knowledge about it. Presuming that you are located in the USA, you are reacting negatively to birth in a country that has a declining birth rate. Presumably, if you were not selfish and arrogant, you would be more concerned about the higher volume of births that are occurring in other countries where the birth rate far outstrips the replacement rate. This not being the case, and you only being concerned about what is directly in front of you, I see that the basis for your world view is selfishness. Get past this. The world does not revolve around you.
>she is immoral for bringing babies into the world
This is only propaganda from people like Barbara Spectre. Note that she only advocates her eugenic views on Western states and not her spiritual home country of Israel. Now that Western states' birth rates have plummeted, those of her ilk are now advocating for mass immigration to bolster falling populations - all while blaming the host country for failure to maintain replacement rate births due to succumbing to eugenics based propaganda.

tl;dr: Don't worry about population growth. We are due for a major population devastating pestilence or war anyway.

[Anonymous No.10470216]

>>10470148
>I don't want children and you didn't give me anything to think otherwise.
Is that really the point. The OP is whining about someone else's child - not his own. His perspective is founded in arrogance regarding other peoples behavior. Without him being an actual genocidal maniac I have trouble taking his perspective seriously. He is just petty and meaningless.

[Anonymous No.10470224]

>>10470039
>demographic explosion
Which demographic explosion?

[Anonymous No.10470225]

>>10470157

[Anonymous No.10470231]

>>10469742
>If there are circumstances where euthanasia makes sense, then there's an argument for extending that reasoning to antinatalism.
It makes the most sense to me for the antinatalists to be euthanized first. The rest of us will suffer as we always have - but we will be able to spare them the burden which they seem weary of carrying.

[Anonymous No.10470241]

>>10470119
Good work mate
OP stop posting these threads you cunt

[Anonymous No.10470257]

>>10468401
>Israel sterilized a large number of Africans as part of their immigration process.
This seems more political than anything. To the best of my knowledge, those Africans that they are actively recruiting, belong to a large branch of Levites. There are political sects within the Jewish population that apparently see them as an embarrassment and want them to be eliminated. Israel only advocates for open Israeli borders for certain segments of Jewish people and not for any other demographic. This is not my thread, so I will not deign to dictate moderation of it, but the scope of this issue is acutely outside the scope of antinatalism and will only serve to derail.

[Anonymous No.10470260]

>>10466641
> 'if you were at the theatre next to me I would get up and leave faggot'
I think your father said it best OP

[Anonymous No.10470266]

>>10468322
>It is the most effective way of spreading antinatalism, right? Just to kill the babies as they're born.
If antinatalists started a wide scale campaign of murdering babies then their movement would be quenched in short order.

[Anonymous No.10470268]

>>10470216
OP is pathetic too and counter-productive for the AN and CF cause. Just pointing the fact that the guy who insults him is pathetic too.

[Anonymous No.10470272]

>>10470224
10 billions people in 2050, this one

[Anonymous No.10470274]

>>10468272
>PASTA
I concede that you are probably right, though I did enjoy the exercise.

[Anonymous No.10470278]

>>10470195
You really need to sort out your thoughts here, you're saying a lot of things that are wholly irrelevant. Anti-natalism is concerned with birth in general, there's no reason for you to latch onto some belief that hasn't been professed that makes any distinction between birth in the United States and birth "in other countries where the birth rate far outstrips the replacement rate." There's nothing selfish about wanting to avoid suffering that is viewed as needless and immoral, especially when it doesn't benefit you to hold that view (or even to see it acted out). It would harm me if everyone stopped having children but I still think it's the right thing to do.

[Anonymous No.10470292]

>>10470272
>10 billions people in 2050, this one
The primary causation for this potential growth is not within Western states. It is elsewhere. If antinatalism is a laudable goal then it should be promoted for areas with the highest birth rates.

[Anonymous No.10470297]

>>10466702
>baby born black (not shocking)
God bless you you crazy autist

[Anonymous No.10470316]

>>10470278
>There's nothing selfish about wanting to avoid suffering that is viewed as needless and immoral,
It absolutely is selfish to treat the suffering of others as something that is not their own responsibility - but the responsibility of some perfumed prince to moderate. Suffering is the human condition. Most of us have learned to accept that. If you cannot do so then you are free to exit the ride.

[Anonymous No.10470328]

>>10470316
What does any of this have to do with what I said?

[Anonymous No.10470346]

>>10466702
>by born white
>baby born with hair
>father leaves before birth again
>baby born born black (not shocking)
>baby scared by doctor and screams
>lights go out during birth
>baby shaken by uncle
>baby crusher by uncly
>birth video leaked to porn website

[Anonymous No.10470348]

>>10470328
>What does any of this have to do with what I said?
I greentexted a portion of your text and specifically addressed that point in my post. If you cannot understand how interchange of thought processes between individuals is conducted then you are probably so autistic that you think that I have a responsibility to stay within you constraints because I am only a figment of your imagination - to do with as you wish.

[Anonymous No.10470358]

>>10470348
Jesus lol

[Anonymous No.10470367]

>>10466641
Compared to what the fuck you are, any life is a blessing. Nice chart though, you have a promising career in finance ahead of you.

[Anonymous No.10470380]

>>10466702
>morality with a chart

analytic philosophy was a mistake

[Anonymous No.10470392]

>>10466702
>baby born black
>(not shocking)

[Anonymous No.10470450]

>>10466641
Frome where this pasta comes from? I'm seriously curious about it. And why everyone has taken this bait?

[Anonymous No.10470456]

>>10466702
Your life is the best antinatalist argument

[Anonymous No.10470463]

well, why DON'T you just kill yourself, you insufferable autistic waste of finite resources?

[Anonymous No.10470481]

>>10470450
>And why everyone has taken this bait?
I have not engaged in this line of discussion for over 10 years so it was a learning exercise for me.

[Anonymous No.10470523]

>hurr durr there is more suffering than pain in life so just dont be born
that is incredibly philosophically ignorant, antinatalism is truly the edgiest, most immature philosophy. i never met an antinatalist who wasnt an autistic social outcast NEET like OP. what a coincidence, eh?

[Anonymous No.10470527]

>>10470523
Anti-natalism isn't contingent upon there being more suffering than joy, retard

[Anonymous No.10470528]

>>10470523
suffering than pleasure*

[Anonymous No.10470530]

>>10466702

[Anonymous No.10470718]

>>10469722
>Contraceptives are so you don't get AIDs you retard.

[Anonymous No.10470747]

>>10470380
How is Camus an analytic?

[Anonymous No.10470809]

>>10466702
>>10466641
antinatalists are edgy miserable pseuds that justify their misery by saying that everyone else is miserable too

[Anonymous No.10470820]

>>10470456
this

[Anonymous No.10470826]

>>10466641
>>10466702
now this is shitposting

[Anonymous No.10470881]

>>10470809

[Anonymous No.10470918]

>>10468123
your argument is if someone is not alive he dont need pain. Next argument in favour of antinatalism

[Anonymous No.10470923]

>>10466702
This man has the potential to revitalize analytic philosophy. OP please drop the antinatalism for something more esoteric and get into academia.

[Anonymous No.10470929]

>>10466641
>>
>How do I explain my views without coming across as arrogant? I have tried everything. for example I sent my sister an excel spreadsheet comparing her babies potential pleasure within the first 20 minutes of life with its potential suffering
Dude what the fuck. Your rampant, unhinged autism aside, don't you think that someone who was three fucking children by the age of 21 clearly isn't thinking rationally about the whole thing? Why would she listen to arguments?

[Anonymous No.10470956]

>>10468239
How disgustingly selfish

[Anonymous No.10471009]

>>10468367
Insects have many kids at once and do nothing to make sure they live. Their strategy is to make as many of themselves as possible so that some survive at least. The reason I don't think your analogy is equivalent to human reproduction is because humans are conscious creatures that care for and raise their kids for a long time. As for going against biology, we control our diets not for nutritional value, in most cases, but in taste and tradition. Even people who eat healthy do so as a way to work towards their ideal. Many people also stay up late, do drugs, drink beer, and other biologically unnecessary things. Biology is involved with what we do, but it isn't solely what dictates our actions, and I think people can go against it purposely. Sex too, isn't simply a reproductive drive. For some, love is involved, while for others it is lust, and I don't think lust is entirely biological either.
>But can a normally functioning person casually slice off each of their fingers with a paper cutter?
I think this is besides the point. Just because it's unnatural for someone to do it doesn't dismiss that people can go against their biology, especially when these people are distinct cases of that. I'm pretty religious and don't see people as biologically determined.
>>10470956
I don't see how it's selfish when the relationship is reciprocal. In fact, the kids are fed, changed, and catered to for most of their wants and needs with some discipline too. It's not like they're slaves or have some horrible life.

[Anonymous No.10471034]

>>10466702
put me in the fuckin’ screenie bitch!

[Anonymous No.10471056]

>>10470463
>why DON'T you just kill yourself
Antinatalists probably don't kill themselves for the same reason most other people don't kill themselves, which is that they have an instinctual aversion to self-harm. That argument is really stupid and I don't know why anti-antinatalists keep bringing it up.
There's also the part where antinatalism is opposed to bringing new lives into existence and not necessarily any sort of advocacy for ending already existing lives.

[Anonymous No.10471082]

You've been btfo by your dad

[Anonymous No.10471143]

>>10471009
>Many people also stay up late, do drugs, drink beer, and other biologically unnecessary things.
It depends on what you mean by "biologically unnecessary." The fact people behave the way they do with drugs or insomnia isn't a biology transcending exercise in free will, all of that has completely biological explanations and had to work out that way as a consequence of evolutionary history. Drugs / beer for example are about as biologically deterministic phenomena as you can get, they're chemicals that tweak our brains in consistent ways that cause us to pursue and indulge in them in equally consistent ways.
>I'm pretty religious and don't see people as biologically determined.
I don't see what religion has to do with the fact we engage in eating, sleeping, and reproducing in largely similar ways lower less self-aware / non- self-aware animals do. I am baffled that you could see reproduction as biology transcending, just look at the world population from the ancient past through to modern times, it follows a highly regular linear trend i.e. exactly what you'd expect from a primarily *instinctual* behavior, not some self-aware biology transcending decision.
>Insects have many kids at once and do nothing to make sure they live.
That sounds like this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R/K_selection_theory
I don't think it's a super-relevant distinction though. As you can see when looking into that general r/K selection concept, there exist plenty of nonhuman animals who follow something like the K-strategy (investing more in fewer offspring). It doesn't make those animals more self-aware or morally superior to r-strategists, both are just different approaches species take in reproductive behavior.
>The reason I don't think your analogy is equivalent to human reproduction is because humans are conscious creatures that care for and raise their kids for a long time.
Well again, it's not even an analogy. An analogy would involve drawing a comparison between reproduction and some non-reproductive process e.g. "reproduction for biological organisms is like an echo for sounds." Insect reproduction simply *is* the same process of reproduction, just in the context of insects instead of humans.

[Anonymous No.10471207]

>>10471143
This went from this >>10468218
to the current conversation on biology and so I don't think it's relevant to the thread anymore. My original point was that having children is more fulfilling than pursuing a career for all but the most competitive people. Most people would rather make a family and settle down while spending time with their loved ones than working long hours every day to stay on top of their field. This only relates to antinatalism tangentially tho. I don't think it's wrong to bring children into the world because I don't think the world is fundamentally unjustified. That's really what I was going for, but I was sidetracked.

[Anonymous No.10471215]

>>10466641
Damn me for even having to ask this but are your nieces and nephews by the same dad that's not even married to your sister?

How the fuck are your parents chill about that and freaking about over you, both their kids sound fucked.

[Anonymous No.10471257]

>>10466641
My lil brother just got arrested for allegedly forcing himself on his own wife. I understand the implications of this charge. However, the same woman who charged my brother with multiple felonies is now asking me; a person she barley knows, to watch her three toddlers while she earns money at a gentleman's club. As a person who grew up and lived with my brother until very recently, I find it very difficult that he would do something like this. On the other end, I have his wife of five years crying over the phone that he abused her with a firearm and that she dosn't know what to do with the kids. As this crying over the phone about the situation occurs I hear her break character to say "sit down Lyla and stop bugging mommy, she's in a serious adult conversation" and then right back to crying like on cue. Not once but 4 times! Am I crazy or is she crazy?

[Anonymous No.10471258]

>>10470747
He's not but I'm not going to change a filename for a shitpost. I hate Camus. I just wanted a picture of a post-analytic continental philosopher making a goofy face.

[Anonymous No.10471266]

You are autistic, your sister is a slut and your parents are simpletones. Average family of the 4chan user.

[Anonymous No.10471279]

>>10471207
>career
I would make a strong distinction between craft and career. The word "career" reduces work to money / subsistence, while "craft" emphasizes the art of what you're dedicating yourself to.
>I don't think the world is fundamentally unjustified
I don't think anyone can honestly claim the world is just unless they've personally experienced every instance of suffering anyone in the world has ever gone through. Like Jesus or the Buddha could take a stance like that, but for one of us to claim that would involve either pretending that we know how everyone else in world history has felt or dismissing the importance of any suffering they've gone through as not even worth considering.

[Anonymous No.10471318]

>>10466641
>>10466702
Great post, anon.

[Anonymous No.10471323]

>>10471279
I have faith that God's creation is just, and I still think that children are more fulfilling than a craft, unless you are very disagreeable and extremely successful/invested in your craft.

[Anonymous No.10471329]

>>10466702

What a strange year.

[Anonymous No.10471375]

>>10471323
>I have faith that God's creation is just
This would depend on there being some sort of afterlife to balance out / redress all the extreme injustices of known Earthly life, right?
Because if you're arguing all the young children throughout world history who got horribly sick and died a slow painful death had a just living experience that's the only way I could even begin to see making sense of that.

[Anonymous No.10471380]

>>10470523
Well, the most famous antinatalists are professors of philosophy, so not exactly autistic outcasts

[Anonymous No.10471385]

>>10471329
This has always been a retarded image macro.
He was famous for saying "I like you just the way you are," which is the exact opposite of the sentiment "you should change how you act to meet my expectations."

[Anonymous No.10471392]

>>10471375
Just in all ways, not just the afterlife. Just isn't happiness tho, nor lack of suffering.

[Anonymous No.10471394]

>>10466641
This is one of the most excellent parodies I have ever seen. I giggled enough to spill my tea, and I am clinically depressed. Well done.

[Anonymous No.10471415]

>>10471392
>not just the afterlife
I think that's pretty fucking wrong then, I am 100% certain with the cases of horribly sick / early death children throughout world history that their Earthly lives weren't "just." It's not like they even lived long enough to be able to do immoral things that could be used as justification for bad things happening to them. I don't think a normal person could even begin really understanding the scope of suffering in just one of these lives without living it themselves, and there were billions of them.

[Anonymous No.10471445]

>>10466702
Holy shit

[Anonymous No.10471453]

>>10466702

[Anonymous No.10471499]

>>10471415
Not individually maybe, but as a whole I mean.

[Anonymous No.10471571]

>>10466641
lol nice touch with the spreadsheet. hope no one takes this seriously though.

[Anonymous No.10471682]

I think antinatalist are dismissed because they break a sort of fundamental and sacred axiom. It's something like "being is good"and since OP and other antinatalists call to question that axiom, they are laughed at for their foolishness. But it is foolish to question it, since doing so can lead to dark conclusions.

[Anonymous No.10471688]

>>10468098
I tried to fix what -I think- is wrong with the pic you posted. What does Benatar mean when he states that "There is no pain, which is good" and "There is no pleasure, which is not bad."? Good for who?

Nontheless, your logic is on point anon, I'm just not entirely sold on the "asymmetry of pleasure and pain argument" thing.

[Anonymous No.10471700]

>>10466641
powerful shitpost

[Anonymous No.10471704]

shit i remember when you posted that shit on /r9k/ fucken kek

[Anonymous No.10471723]

>>10471009
>It's not like they're slaves
They are. The entire parent child relationship is based on coercion

[Anonymous No.10471756]

>>10471723
You could see it either way. That children are slaves to their parents or that the parents are slaves to their children. A better way to see it is as a reciprocal bond of voluntary servitude. This is to say little to nothing about the actual experience of a relationship between parent and child, which is to complex and specific to the instance that I don't think it can be generally categorized.

[Anonymous No.10471800]

>>10466641
This is copy pasta worthy levels of autism. This is great bait.

[Anonymous No.10471859]

posted to r/4chan
please upvote

[Anonymous No.10471881]

>>10471688
good: deficit represented by wants/needs ameliorated
bad: deficit represented by wants/needs unfulfilled or exasperated
good:no deficit of wants or needs
good: no deficit of wants or needs

Wow, that was easy