/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.11941982]

How come antinatalism is position so disliked around here, of all places?
How do you refute it?

[Anonymous No.11942004]

>>11941982
Because only me and you are real anon, everybody else is a system of control, see as they use status to try to confuse you.

[Anonymous No.11942011]

Stop posting this tread when there are 2 up already.
Dumb shitposter.

[Anonymous No.11942036]

>>11942011
Didn't intend it,also ctrl+f-ing catalogue gives nothing, so screw off.

[Anonymous No.11942578]

>>11942036
You have the same writing style as the 2 others. don't try to fake it you tard.

[Anonymous No.11943133]

>>11941982

>>11943003

[Anonymous No.11943239]

I don't know every antinatalist talking point, but here are my answers to some of them.

>Life isn't exclusively suffering, and even so, there is meaning to life beyond sensations such as pain and pleasure.

>Evolution is a framework within which there is a capability for success or failure resulting in a muted immortality of genetic legacy.

>Objective, but non-absolute morality is derived from evolutionary viability of actions and traits.

>Eugenics can vastly reduce inheritable diseases

>Antinatalism is only appealing to those intelligent and/or sad enough to get past the "yuck" factor of taking an anti-life position, so in addition to not being actionable on a large scale, it keeps said intelligent people sad, if they were sad to begin with, by denying them families and descendants, which are usually powerfully emotionally positive and life-stabilizing, if the person can keep his or her family together in the current shitshow of familial destruction.

>Antinatalism is dysgenic with regards to fertility and self-defeating - because it decreases the fertility of said intelligent people and ensures that a smaller portion of the population would be interested in antinatalism with every passing generation.

[Anonymous No.11944283]

>>11943239
>Life isn't exclusively suffering
>it keeps said intelligent people sad, if they were sad to begin with, by denying them families and descendants, which are usually powerfully emotionally positive and life-stabilizing
I see shit like this and begin to wonder if lesser people are genuinely sheepish enough that they don't even perceive how dominant suffering is in their life. Can you recount any time in your life when you didn't desire something? When you actually fulfill a goal, how long does the pleasure received from doing so last?

But I don't know, maybe I'm the dumb one.

[Anonymous No.11944322]

>>11941982
>utilitarianism
there

it's over

[Anonymous No.11944329]

>>11944283
. Can you recount any time in your life when you didn't desire something?

Is desire suffering?
>When you actually fulfill a goal, how long does the pleasure received from doing so last?
Longer then the 0 pleasure I'd get from never existing.

[Anonymous No.11944342]

>>11944283
Suffering is a valid experience, as valid as any other. Without it other aspects of life lose meaning. Antinatalist incel BTFO.

[Anonymous No.11944525]

>>11944329
>Is desire suffering?
Yes. There isn't a single instance of suffering you cannot attribute to desire. The only reason things like pain are bad is because we desire to escape them.
>Longer then the 0 pleasure I'd get from never existing.
Are you going to answer the question or pussy foot around?

Please make an actual argument for existence being preferable to non-existence. I don't want to be right.

[Anonymous No.11944572]

>>11941982
Because antinatalism can be refuted with four words:
>existence is a good

[Anonymous No.11944582]

It's only irrefutable on a personal level. You can stop yourself from procreating but not others.

[Anonymous No.11944613]

>>11941982
I don't experience existence as so bad that I'd rather not exist, nor do I think it is so bad for any person, besides a few exceptions (which don't discount the rule).

[Anonymous No.11944632]

Kill yourself. If you actually believed in antinatalism, you would, but instead you bitch and moan and drag the rest of us down with you. By far the easiest position to refute because anyone who claims to believe in it is lying to themselves and everyone else

[Anonymous No.11944660]

>>11944613
>which don't discount the rule

Why is a world with no people worse than a world in which a fracture of people get horrible deseases, disabilities, raped, murdered, tortured, etc.?

[Anonymous No.11944668]

>>11944632
>Kill yourself. If you actually believed in antinatalism, you would
What a dumb refutation.

Anyone that was more afraid of life than death would kill themselves at the first opportunity, you included, regardless of what you rationalized. The opposite is true as well. Self-preservation is not delegated to rational thought. That is my argument. Besides, life is a temporary problem that you only encounter once.

[Anonymous No.11944672]

>>11944582
not if we put birth control in the water supply

[Anonymous No.11944685]

>>11944632
hypocrisy doesnt actually disprove an argument. it just makes them an hypocrite.

Just like how I know running will make me lose weight but im too lazy to do it. Does that mean running is a lie?

[Anonymous No.11944690]

>>11944342
>a valid experience
Pleasure and suffering are not valid experiences.

[Anonymous No.11944726]

>>11941982
Because not everyone is as miserable as antinatialists.
>hey life can be pretty shit, here's some more shit that will make it seem more shit.
thanks, but no thanks.

[Anonymous No.11944749]

>>11944525
So you’re saying that wanting a x-box is suffering?

[Anonymous No.11944780]

>>11944660
Just because people have bad things happen to them doesn't mean the entire world is bad. People can have good lives with terrible diseases, people can get over rape, people can withstand torture, like martyrs, etc. There are people that have experienced terrible things that aren't antinatilist. It's about perspective and will, I think.

[Anonymous No.11944865]

>>11944749
Yes. No matter what you do, even if all of your needs are met, you will just invent new desires.

[Anonymous No.11944878]

>>11941982
>of all places?
I love how antinatalist think we're all a tragic mess like OP who see no point in life and try to rationalize his shitty circumstances.

>yea debate me bro, yea thats what I thought you can't refute my position >:^)
these brainlets are worse than vegan niggers

[Anonymous No.11944893]

>>11944283
>But I don't know, maybe I'm the dumb one.
thats highly probable

[Anonymous No.11944928]

>>11944865
>even if all of your needs are met, you will just invent new desires.
Yes and that's why we have shit like houses, cars, medicine, music, art since some people found it a little lacking to be living in a cave without a source of heat, dying from an infection and their only source of entertainment was the 3 stories old man Knurr, who was 46 at the time, told over and over again.

Now we have fucking drugs that make existence so fucking good that people would rather be on them rather than not and die in the process of attaining them and using them.

Most of us dont need it, but it seems like antinatialists require a life completely without any kind of suffering for it to be worth while.

Even if we reduced the amount of suffering to be less of that of pleasure, antinatialists would still insist that their philosphy holds water due to the risk of suffering happening in a persons life.

And if we ever get to a point where life is without suffering, antinatialists would still insist life isnt worth living since life is going to perish before the heath death of the universe and we should pull the plug instead of dying off slowly.

The fuck do you do with that kind of a philosophy?
It's the "thanks, captain obvious, but you're still not fixing shit" philosophy.

[Anonymous No.11944959]

>>11941982
Organisms literally exist to reproduce and make offspring.
To have children is our primary goal in life.
We're essentially just increasingly complex machines that have been evolving and replicating ourselves over billions of years.
If you don't want children there is something wrong with you or our culture.

[Anonymous No.11944985]

>>11944928
>Even if we reduced the amount of suffering to be less of that of pleasure
My point is that you can't. I have lived under harsh conditions and it is no different than living with amenities once you get used to it. All of this is a trick from the ape part of your brain. The end of suffering is an impossibility, it is a carrot on a stick. The brain of every animal is wired to suffer constantly.
>since some people found it a little lacking
Nah, those things came around because they ran out of shit to do.
>The fuck do you do with that kind of a philosophy?
Embrace the arts, listen to classical music, become a monk, try to reduce suffering in the world, idk.

[Anonymous No.11945001]

>>11944985
>Embrace the arts, listen to classical music, become a monk, try to reduce suffering in the world, idk.
Well that is kind of my point, antinatilism is pointless to dwell upon unless your purpose is to reduce suffering rather than rub everyones face in it, just to prove your point.

[Anonymous No.11945026]

people have kids these days because they're bored and lonely and don't know what else to spend their money on

and guess what: that's actually a beautiful fucking reason

[Anonymous No.11945028]

>>11945001
Well, I'm not OP and I'm not even familiar with anti-natalism tbhfam. I just think non-existence is preferable to existence, and one practical application of that belief is that you aren't doing future children any favors by birthing them. Compassion and aesthetics are something entirely separate from material and carnal desire, and my argument would be that since life is largely an experience of suffering we cannot really control, adding another life to the world is a net negative. It is better to focus on the aforementioned things if you can control the ape part of your brain to some degree.

[Anonymous No.11945050]

>>11945028
>I just think non-existence is preferable to existence
>but I will continue to enjoy the fruits of life and the products of people who desire things

[Anonymous No.11945069]

>>11941982
antinatalism is a dogwhistle for incelism

[Anonymous No.11945072]

>>11945028
>I am not familiar with anti-natalism but I pretty much am an anti-natalist
Your offspring could cure cancer and you'd still call it a net negative. There is just no point arguing such a position, its a philosophical dead end.

[Anonymous No.11945075]

>>11945028
life is not positive and death is not negative

the suffering in life is what makes it beautiful, the peacefulness of death is what makes it disgusting

this isn't some yin yang dialectical argument, it's just that everything is everything is everything ever

your words and feelings are not your own, and that's ok

and your children started dying the moment they were born

yknow?

[Anonymous No.11945126]

>>11945075
>the suffering in life is what makes it beautiful
When I see a beautiful painting I think it is beautiful because it represents the human ideal that we are subconsciously driven to desire, and for a moment I feel a oneness with the world. I suffer because I am wired to constantly try and embody that ideal. Suffering doesn't make art better. Art does not fulfill that kind of desire. If I was constantly surrounded by beautiful art I would not grow desensitized to it. It's not like busting a nut after nofap.

[Anonymous No.11945142]

>>11945126
art is not different from life

like, how could it be?

art is suffering etc.

trying to be "like" art is just being a bad artist

which is what it seems like everybody is encouraged to be nowadays

for source material see: Werther, Bovary, Portrait of an Artist etc etc

[Anonymous No.11945150]

>>11944685
But in this case it does.

If a person truly vauled non existence, they’d do it.

[Anonymous No.11945158]

>>11945069
More like Atheism for people who didnt grow out of the "I debate to feel intellectually superior" phase and got bored with beating creationists with simple mind tricks and basic biology.

I hardly spend time debating antinatilist talking points as much as I debate the reason some people flaunt them so ardently. Because it's a philosophy that can be summed up in 3 paragraphs or less.
>Life is mostly shit so people shouldnt have kids because their lives will probably be shit and everything is pointless anyway, debate me!

[Anonymous No.11945181]

>>11945142
>art is not different from life
Imagine the human as one of Plato's Forms. Beautiful art, aesthetic art, is the perfect representation of that Form, it is the real turned into the ideal. A depiction of suffering can be divinely beautiful, but actual suffering is not. The problem with art today is that everyone is trying to represent dumb normalshit desires, not the Forms. Most of the art world today is consumerist garbage, just making stuff that Schopie would call charming at best, terrifying at worst.

[Anonymous No.11945189]

Better to experience something rather than nothing. But it's purely subjective there is no way to really refute it

[Anonymous No.11945191]

>>11941982
Antinatalism is cuck philosophy taken to an extreme. It's people feeling guilty about being born. We gave that shit up along with Original Sin. Somehow, godless morons have managed to revive the worst parts of religion with none of the good parts.

[Anonymous No.11945259]

>>11945181
>beautiful art... is the real turned into the ideal

nope, art is the hinge that can turn the real into the ideal, or vice versa

there is nothing intrinsically positive about art -- the best art is simply re-presentation (controversial in the age of post-abstraction but I stand by this)

>depiction of suffering can be divinely beautiful, but actual suffering is not

suffering is indifferent

>the problem with art today...

is that people have no fucking idea why they are making it any more, they just make stuff just because they don't know what else to do

the only good reason to make art is because you *have* to, and this has nothing to do with beauty or forms or life or death or whatever

[Anonymous No.11945265]

>>11944322
brainlet, if there is no people, no need for utilitarianism.

[Anonymous No.11945272]

>>11944572
proof?

[Anonymous No.11945280]

Suffering may follow pleasure and overwhelm it most of the time, but life is worth living because of those short moments of pleasure.

Think of a diamond, rare and precious. We are in awe of its beauty even if it may be imperfect in shape. If there is a diamond in a dung hill, most of us would take great pains to find it and try our best to preserve it. We may suffer doing this but we do so because we appreciate this piece of beauty that stands out among the mass of ugly.

This what reality is, entropy. We are more likely to suffer because it is more probable to happen. But a small bit of order makes a lifetime of chaos bearable.

[Anonymous No.11945284]

>>11941982
Suffering isnt bad.

Done.

[Anonymous No.11945288]

>>11945259
>nope, art is the hinge that can turn the real into the ideal, or vice versa
>there is nothing intrinsically positive about art -- the best art is simply re-presentation (controversial in the age of post-abstraction but I stand by this)
I'm talking about aesthetics, not finger painting. Are you saying beauty isn't intrinsically positive? I'm not even sure I have the energy to go down this rabbit hole if I'm being honest with you.

[Anonymous No.11945313]

>>11945272
axioms don't need proof

[Anonymous No.11945334]

>>11945288
lol

ya pls don't get into it with me, I don't really care

just don't make any art because you're "into beauty" or whatever

beauty is not one single thing

btw you really should try to read those books I mentioned earlier -- they're all quite old and make very strong arguments against the kind of neo-platonic idealism that you think you've come up with

[Anonymous No.11945335]

>>11945313
neither are they a refutation ;)

[Anonymous No.11945347]

>>11945334
>you really should try to read those books I mentioned earlier
I will.

[Anonymous No.11945379]

I legit don't know how non-existence beats existence.

[Anonymous No.11945386]

the anti-natalist argument sucks because all it does is destroy. it fails to take into account the possibility of transcending this hell, and helping others do the same.

[Anonymous No.11945389]

>>11941982
>How do you refute it?
How do you refute a tantrum? There's nothing to refute.

[Anonymous No.11945400]

>>11945150
If I stated that the sky was blue, yet I believed that it was red, would the sky be red?

[Anonymous No.11945428]

>>11945386
>it fails to take into account the possibility of transcending this hell
What if the way to transcend this hell was to let go of carnal desires, reproducing being one of them? I've got admit, once I came to the conclusion that suffering was unavoidable and overwhelmingly dominant I've been suffering a lot less. I used to see monks walk over coals and wonder how they did it without feeling pain, but a couple weeks ago someone accidentally ran a drill through my hand and I was just kind of like "meh." So maybe the existence vs non-existence dichotomy isn't the best way to word it. Would you choose suffering and pleasure over neutrality?

[Anonymous No.11945429]

>>11945400

define red and blue

[Anonymous No.11945435]

>>11945272
Existence is a prerequisite to all good, therefore, existence is a good.

[Anonymous No.11945451]

>>11945428

transcendence by necessity entails suffering and strife. what you're doing is closing your eyes, so the monster can't see you anymore.

[Anonymous No.11945464]

>>11945435
Define good.

[Anonymous No.11945473]

>>11945435
this is retarded. if its a prerequisite to ALL good then it can't be a good itself because it can't be a prerequisite to itself

[Anonymous No.11945493]

>>11945451
Literally every single religion with enlightenment as the end goal says you need to distance yourself from desire/attachment/suffering. (all the same thing really)

[Anonymous No.11945494]

>>11945429
Fuck... I have been BTFO. I cede this argument to you.

[Anonymous No.11945496]

>>11944283
>desire is the same as suffering
>suffering is bad
If you really believed in the "life is not worth living" meme that you insist on rubbing in everyone's face, you would kill yourself. No one likes antinatalists because they're the literary equivalent of teenage attention whores who down a bottle of Advil every time they feel sad, only antinatalists have even less spine.

[Anonymous No.11945503]

>>11945464
the absence of suffering, the latter antinatialists seem to find under every rock they turn over. It's really an argument between half empty, half full kinds of people.

You just have to accept that you're a misserable person who dont see the value in anyhing and that nobody likes you because you suck the energy out of everything by being a black hole of nihilism and self pity.

:)

[Anonymous No.11945508]

>>11945503
>the absence of suffering
so non-existence

[Anonymous No.11945567]

>>11945508

I dont know, it's not my job to prove the inherent value of life if you're such a misserable piece of shit that you cant cobble together something that resembles it on your own. And you have to subscribe to rick&morty tier philosophies like antinatialism to justify continuously living in missery and self loathing.

That is entirely subjective. And so is pleasure and suffering.

if all you see is suffering, then off yourself. Relieve others of the burden of you.
>inb4 hurr I have invested interest in staying alive due to animalistic instinct durr

This is why nobody likes or bother to talk about antinatilism. It's the equivelant of walking into a kindergarden of happy kids and telling them they are all going to die, their parents, their friends, their pet dog is going to die. It's just so fucking pointless just to score some edgy points with impressionistic sad boys teenagers on the internet or even worse, justifying your own misserable existence because you cant be bothered with improving it.

Not my job to justify or prove value of your existence.

[Anonymous No.11945568]

>>11945493

i had written out a longer post in response to this, but all i want to say now is that you're just distancing yourself, and you are still going to experience all three of those things regardless of whether or not you transcend or not. i wasn't glorifying those things.

[Anonymous No.11945569]

>>11944283
>Can you recount any time in your life when you didn't desire something?
Yes. It lasts too. Just stop being spooked.

[Anonymous No.11945595]

>>11945567
>I dont know
Non-existence fits the definition of good you just gave me. What do you mean you don't know?
>rick&morty tier philosophies
What is Rick & Morty?
>That is entirely subjective
But non-existence fits your definition of good.
>if all you see is suffering
I am willing to bet I suffer less than you do. You seem very angry and project a lot. Perhaps if attributed less value to this existence you wouldn't be so miserable.

[Anonymous No.11945598]

>>11945464
It's a primitive notion. May as well ask the antinatalist to define suffering.
>>11945473
all other good, ya tard

[Anonymous No.11945625]

Life is dukkha

[Anonymous No.11945629]

>>11945595
>But non-existence fits your definition of good.
good wouldnt exist then retard

[Anonymous No.11945636]

Shut up you fucking kike white people are going to have kids whether you like it or not

[Anonymous No.11945637]

>>11945625
Life is dookie

[Anonymous No.11945655]

>>11945636
thanks for reminding me that judaism is a savage materialist religion that encourages spawning as many children as possible. please tell how I should live like the jew, /pol/

[Anonymous No.11945669]

Well I'm an anti-natalist and I wish I wasn't, I wish I could experience joy but that doesn't seem realistic at this point, I don't think anybody should be having children because as far as I'm concerned, having children is selfish/immoral/wrong, which is especially obvious (to me) as we live in the Kali Yuga (the most spiritually degenerate epoch of time)

[Anonymous No.11945671]

>>11945629
>good wouldnt exist then retard
you said good was an absence

[Anonymous No.11945679]

>>11945669

[Anonymous No.11945716]

>>11945655
In church right now praying that you'll have sex

[Anonymous No.11945720]

>>11945716
thanks

[Anonymous No.11945730]

>>11945671
Why is everything always at an extreme with you antinatialist? everything must be full on pleasure 100% of the time for anyone to reach your goal post, god forbid you stub your toe and castrate yourself.

By absence, I meant it would be preferable there was less of it, but without it, there would be nothing that would contrast good. Without the existence of good, suffering would just be the default state of being and no one would be none the wiser of anything else.

>Hurr durr but if you dont exist you dont have to contend with either.
I'd rather have the option to make that judgement on my own. But for some arbitrary reason, antinatialists have made that not an option due to some copeout argument about self preservation.
All I have to say to that is, if you cant make the argument for suicide, good luck getting people to stop fucking.

[Anonymous No.11945773]

>>11945730
>All I have to say to that is, if you cant make the argument for suicide
With the current direction society is headed in, I'd give maybe 2 decades tops before euthanasia is a widespread phenomena.

[Anonymous No.11945778]

>>11945773
Good thing no one asked for your opinion

[Anonymous No.11945784]

>>11945773
The chinese goverment tried that with the one child policy and they are were (are) a oppressive goverment.

Didnt work out.

[Anonymous No.11945813]

>>11945778
>>11945784
Just you wait, soon enough you'll be in a doctor's office listening to muzak while a tranny injects you with permanent sleepy time juice because you've contracted a crippling illness that the youth can't be bothered to pay for.

[Anonymous No.11946191]

>>11944283
>>11944283
Yes, either that or you have depression. I'm genuinely happy most days. If I was forced to relive my life, but only the bottom 50% of my hours, I'd still do that, mabye even my bottom 30%.

[Anonymous No.11946715]

>>11945265
but antinatalists account for non-existing people in their pleasure calculus

[Anonymous No.11947069]

>>11941982
Anon I see you obliquely fishing for answers to your existential struggles and let me just say this: antinatalism is one of those frames of thought that asks for a perfect answer to living, akin to questions of "the meaning of life," and anyone with any intellectual humility will understand that such things, if they even do exist, are outside the grasp of such limited beings as us, and as such, remember, "the perfect is the enemy of the good."

It is far easier to answer "Why live?" than "What is the meaning of life?"

[Anonymous No.11947674]

>>11945400
If I said that doing this one thing is super good and I love doing it, yet I refuse to actually do it. This to me suggets that the thing they're referring to isn't that good.

[Anonymous No.11948827]

>>11944283
(I'm the person you were replying to)

I don't equate suffering and desire. Unmet desires for the necessities of life surely manifest emotionally as suffering every time, but desires that are wanted manifest, for me at least, as a more benign motivation to get those things - but if I don't it's not a big deal. That people made do with a fraction of the current standard of living for thousands of years and that too much comfort and convenience makes people soft and sick is something I keep in mind. It could be, like you said, a difference in mentality (me being "lesser" and "sheepish" as you put it) though, since I have been depressed in the past with very little desire, except to jack off and die ASAP (thankfully I didn't desire death enough to actually kms). If a person was so consumed with desire, as you might be, and did not know what it was like to lack desire, I could understand seeing it as a negative, and linking it mentally to suffering. As far as the longevity of the pleasure of accomplishments, I'm still feeling pretty good about the period of increased creativity I had a few days ago and what resulted from it. Another recent accomplishment will bring me a lot of financial security, which in itself is a long term reduction of suffering. There are different kinds of accomplishments and different value placed on the different kinds of accomplishments by different people with different natures and circumstances.

If you've philosophically boxed yourself into a corner where your mental activity is dominated by self-pity, despair, self-centeredness, etc., there is a sense in which that is kind of dumb, even within your apparent reduction of all good to pleasure and all bad to suffering. Pleasure tinged with suffering is probably a good definition of guilt and suffering tinged with pleasure is probably a good definition of personal sacrifice.