Antinatalism

[Anonymous No.16352017]

What are your thoughts on antinatalism? After reading Thomas Ligotti's The Conspiracy Against the Human Race, I began flirting with the subjet. What are some other texts that can help me flesh out my opinion? Looking for both pro and anti-antinatalism.

[Anonymous No.16352069]

>>16352017
>Conspiracy Against The Human Race
He fell for the meme

[Anonymous No.16352089]

>>16352017
Pro: David Benatar, "Better to never have been." Long, analytic and frankly boring.
Anti: usually trying to imagine your colorless mid-life without children is enough, when the biological imperative doesn't do the job by itself.

In any case, TCAHR is not a book you'll want to take too seriously. Ligotti's life sucks ass because he's anhedonic. That's too bad for him, and it justifies his views to me. But if that's not your case, dwelling on how life is a bad thing is not going to help you in anything. You may think knowing the "truth" will help you. It will not.
I'm still an antinatalist, though, but mostly because I'm kind of disgusted of how packed and dirty everywhere is nowadays. I wouldn't want to bring new life to suffer here.

[Anonymous No.16352137]

>>16352069
It was a bit meandering and kind of boring at times but not a terrible book all around. Why is it a meme?
>>16352089
The takeaway for me wasn't that I should dwell on how horrid existence is. I almost felt comforted by it. Death is so completely out of my hands and completely inevitable, so why worry about it? I'm certainly not anhedonic but I have always felt like a spectator in life rather than an active participant, which might be why I feel this way about the message of the book.
>David Benatar
Have this on the docket.

[Anonymous No.16352151]

>>16352017
I had two children and I love my kids and hope to let them enjoy life, but I cannot get away from Ligotti's assertion that no matter how much they enjoy going to the beach as a kid, the suffering I have caused them to endure simply by bringing them into existence overwrites any moral good that I do in my life. If my oldest gets pancreatic cancer and suffers 10/10 chronic pain for 4 years, I am the ultimate source of that suffering.

[Anonymous No.16352234]

>>16352151
Somewhere Ligotti said something like "the pain of the zebra being eaten alive is much greater than the enjoyment experienced by the starving lion eating his meal". This stuck with me. Ultimately the best we can do is distract ourselves from the wave of suffering that will inevitably crash down upon is, be it from death or tragedy.

[Anonymous No.16352334]

>>16352151
Only a delusional degenerate would consider such moderate pains a reason for non-existance. Pain is the salt in ones soup and in most cases dependant on ones own actions and mentality. After all nothing worth having comes for free. Take children. To get them the woman you love needs to endure pains which can bring her on the brink of death, yet we adapted and nearly no woman would give her kids away to have it any other way. Plus pain and suffering are great character forming acts. People which have never cried out for a god from suffering, are also never really able to enjoy life, all they know is moderate existance.

Pain is only as bad as you allow it to be. Change your view of it, from being a victim to a stoic stone slowly being formed into something better, cleansed from sufferficial decadence.

Anti-natalism comes from a pathological mind, it's directly against everything we have been evolutionary selected for. Such individuals will never change anything for the etter, but only cease existing and therefore leave the world to those not as pathologically inclined.

Maybe read Hamsuns Growth of the soil.

[Jesus No.16352862]

>>16352017
world became too small. it is the future.

[Anonymous No.16353013]

>>16352151
Bruh cancer don't make you a depressed maniac who wants to commit suicide. If you raised a well-adjusted individual, it would be a part of life and they wouldn't for the life of them regret ever being in this world.

[Anonymous No.16353086]

>>16352017
some books I finished that cover this
>The trouble with being born by EM Cioran
>anything by based Schopenhauer
this is the most taboo subject imo. nobody in my wake life dared to even talk about the subject. in corpus hermeticum it was even said that those who failed to bear a kid unto the world will be punished by the demons after he died. literally a human farm. fuck the ruler of this universe.

[Anonymous No.16353109]

>>16352017
>Arguments for natalism
Sex really feels great, you should have some.

[Anonymous No.16353118]

>>16352017
Anti natalism BTFO

[Anonymous No.16353121]

>>16353086
>the most taboo subject
Yes, because it is wrong according to evolutionary theory, intuition, reason, love of one's folk, and God. No philosophy is more thoroughly incorrect to more peoples and philosophies than complete anti-natalism.

[Anonymous No.16353135]

>>16352017
Children are made for the parents pleasure who disregard that he might suffer. Or rather, they would say it is his fault.

[Anonymous No.16353156]

>>16352334
>the etter, but only cease existing and therefore leave the world to those not as pathologically inclined.
Truly amazing how antinatalist have been around for millennia then.

[Anonymous No.16353174]

>>16352017
Any antinatalist that hasn’t killed themselves is an insincere faggot and should be ignored

[Anonymous No.16353273]

>>16353118
>if you're antinatalist why don't you kill other existing people?
Epic strawman
>>16353174
if you're antinatalist why don't you kill yourself
See above

[Anonymous No.16353277]

>>16353109
I do on occasion. Sex for da feelz =/= reproduction.
>>16353118
I haven't read Benatar yet but couldn't a species-wide self extermination come voluntarily, gradually, and in waves over the next few centuries? This was something that Ligotti suggested. Why would we HAVE to become intergalactic slayers if we only wanted to end our own species?
>>16353121
>blah blah blah no nuance here just feelies and "love for one's folk"
>>16353174
Wouldn't it be possible to be an antinatalist without wanting to extinguish yourself? It's a non sequitur to say that not wanting to create more life necessitates wanting to end your own.

[Anonymous No.16353335]

>>16353277
>Sex for the feels
Lol, you mean while wearing a plastic bag. You're not a lover, just an under-qualified OBGYN, I'm sure you are as satisfying as one.

[Anonymous No.16353356]

>>16353273
>strawman
Not really because you are literally allowing the proliferation of suffering in your conscience.

[Anonymous No.16353368]

>>16353277
Be intellectually honest and overdose on heroin. Spare us your prattling faggotry.

[Anonymous No.16353373]

>>16353356
Living people =/= unborn people

[Anonymous No.16353393]

>>16353356
The eradication of one's existence, in a "normal" life (so no bullshit "what if you're tortured 24/7, huh?" scenarios), is one of the greatest evils that can be inflicted to an existing person, so I naturally avoid it.
However, it will eventually come for me, but not for people who don't exist in first place.

[Anonymous No.16353963]

>>16353156
Just like faggots, it's a pathology which comes around every now and than, mainly induced by societal and pre-natal faktors, which damn the infected specimen into sterility. It's natures way of selecting out trash.

[Jesus No.16354129]

>>16353174
why exactly they need to kill themselves and not you? you think you are more important?

[Jesus No.16354135]

>>16353118
tldr. what?

[Anonymous No.16354259]

>>16353109
>t.says someone who didn't have it[/spolier]

[Anonymous No.16354908]

>>16353335
>>16353368
>Ligotti predicted this
Feggits get so angry at even the thought of non-existing or that existing isn't much more than our animal instincts fighting to keep us above the muck. Can't even consider the perspective.
>You're not a lover
>overdose on heroin
HEARTY KEKS

[Anonymous No.16355561]

>>16354129
I’m not the one who thinks that it’s evil to create human life.

[Anonymous No.16355584]

First worlder psued rationionalization for personally not having a kid. Chad third worlders will never care about that shit and brrrrrrr shit out babies

[Anonymous No.16355718]

>>16355584
Is it really chad to live like an animal; never thinking about your actions and how they influence the world; creating more harm than you could ever atone for; being a leech? Is this REALLY chad, anon?

[Anonymous No.16356194]

Anti-natalism is for gay losers who never understood the value of life and so they never understand the finality of death. Every anti-natalist argument essentially boils down to “wouldn’t you rather your children be DEAD than unhappy or mildly inconvenienced? If you have children they might be SAD sometimes so it’s better for them to be DEAD.”

Also Ligotti is literally brain damaged to the point where he is literally unable to feel happiness, I don’t think you should base your worldview around such a defective person

[Anonymous No.16356237]

>>16356194
As I understand it the general argument is that human existence is more often than not a net negative, which makes your decision to procreate the root reason for at minimum one lifetime of (more or less) suffering. It's not as simple as "we should just kill them because they are sad sometimes lmao".

[Anonymous No.16356242]

>>16356194
>>16356237
And mentioning that Ligotti is anhedonic is a complete strawman that has no bearing antinatalism. He didn't create antinatalism.

[Anonymous No.16356369]

>>16356242
Yeah but OP fell for antinatalism through Ligotti. It’s important to understand the person who introduces you to a certain view and why they view things that way based on any biases

[Anonymous No.16356409]

>>16356369
>fell for antinatalism
I explicitly said that I was "flirting with the subject" and wanted to read more about it, both from pro and anti-antinatalist authors. The claim doesn't sound terrible at it's most base, so why not investigate it more? I expected /lit/ to be more intellectually honest about this instead of lobbing ad-homs and labelling it an incel cope without engaging in the argument at all.

[Anonymous No.16356415]

>>16356409
Ligotti points out in that book that people don't react well to pessimism, which is understandable.

[Jesus No.16356652]

>>16355561
so what? to create life is evil, and you are evil. kill evil.

[Anonymous No.16356681]

>>16356652
u first

[Jesus No.16356700]

>>16356681
you first. antinatalist don't say life is evil, they say modern life is suffering, and creating a new life without considering job markets in future is evil. actually stupid degenerates who has no single neuron in brain devoted to logic processing are also evil, so you are double evil, you really deserve logout from earth server.

[Anonymous No.16356710]

>>16356700
>creating a new life without considering job markets in future is evil
this is your brain on modernism

[Jesus No.16356717]

>>16356710
well, at least I have brain, unlike you, who has only larping pseudo brain. technically you are subhuman.

[Anonymous No.16356739]

>>16356717
you're a meanie doo doo head

[Anonymous No.16356753]

>>16352017
>What are your thoughts on antinatalism?
nowadays at least, it's mostly cope for the destruction of the family and intersexual relations (but I repeat myself).

People who arrived at the position from first principles are a mixture of spergs and victims, the latter unable to avoid universalizing their experiences for sentimental reasons.

[Anonymous No.16356790]

>>16354908
>make retarded statement
>"I disagree"
>hurr exactly what I predicted