/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17510956]

TO. THIS.FUCKING.DAY. N O B O D Y. REFUTED THIS DUDE.

For real now, I haven't seen any good argument against this dude thesis, it truly makes me question the idea of bring another being to this world.

[Anonymous No.17510963]

>>17510956
Check the warosu. And quit shilling this bs here. How much are you getting paid to sell this shit? A thread died for this shit.

[Anonymous No.17510968]

>>17510956
This gets refuted here all the time, and this place is full of retards

[Anonymous No.17510973]

>>17510956
It's refuted by
>suffering is good

[Anonymous No.17510984]

>>17510968
No, the only shitty thing that I see are like this >>17510973
Besides that I haven't see a good arguments.

[Anonymous No.17510988]

>>17510956
you must be 18 to post here

[Anonymous No.17510992]

>>17510963
Never asked to be born bro, no I only shitpost to cope about my suffering existence, help me bro, give some bloomer books.

[Anonymous No.17510997]

>>17510988
I'm 31, brother.

[Anonymous No.17511007]

>it’s a depressed philosophycel projects his own misery onto humanity book

[Anonymous No.17511015]

>>17510984
>good arguments
Subjectivism is irrefutable. As is the fact that existence is adversarial.

[Anonymous No.17511016]

>>17510997
even worse

[Anonymous No.17511027]

>>17511007
>lets attack the dude, but not the thesis of the books

Cope.

[Anonymous No.17511028]

>>17510997
embarrassing. it sucks your parents were such failures that you'd think dave benetar makes points that haven't already been covered over the span of more than 2000 years. maybe it's time to take on some responsibility

[Anonymous No.17511038]

>>17511027
no need to, all of his ramblings are born from his misery. find one happy person and his entire thesis is disproven. i suggest you get some therapy or happy pills anon, this is no way to live a life.

[Anonymous No.17511061]

>>17511038
Just give some good bloomers literature bro

[Anonymous No.17511064]

>>17510973
>suffering isn’t actually bad bro, just suffer bro
Literally cope

[Anonymous No.17511066]

>>17511061
Anything is bloomer literature if applied correctly. I suggest the hermetic texts.

[Anonymous No.17511071]

>>17511064
see >>17510988

[Anonymous No.17511072]

>>17510992
Unironically Kierkegaard or a gym pass. Your choice.

[Anonymous No.17511073]

>>17511064
>don't confront your issues
May as well get it over with already anon. You know you want to.

[Anonymous No.17511075]

>>17511066
>occult shit as bloomer literature

You are one of thoses Guenonfags right?

[Anonymous No.17511079]

>>17511075
No, never read Guenon. The hermetic texts aren't exactly occult if you're not a retard.

[Anonymous No.17511080]

>>17510956
>it truly makes me question the idea of bring another being to this world
"Existence" is inevitable. If you don't have a kid, your hypothetical kid that you would have had will just be born as something else.

[Anonymous No.17511082]

>>17511073
> just suffer bro! it's worthy!

Say that to a child with cogenital cancer, bro.

[Anonymous No.17511089]

>>17511082
Something something pressure diamonds something something literally the best living standards man has ever achieved and bitchboys like you would give it up because you got rejected by Stacy in high school

[Anonymous No.17511097]

>>17511089
Just admint bro, that being born in general is not that worthy, just stop coping or projecting, your nigger.

[Anonymous No.17511099]

>>17511071
Still not an argument

[Anonymous No.17511100]

>>17511079
Yes, they are, better to read Zhuangzi that some hermeticshit.

[Anonymous No.17511105]

>>17511097
Imagine believing that life is such utter agony and yet you're waiting for life to kill you instead of doing the job yourself. Grow some balls.

[Anonymous No.17511107]

>>17511080
Even if you were pulled out of death again, you wouldnt maintain a stream of conciousness so theres no real practical point as we all want our conciousess to be preserved

[Anonymous No.17511112]

>>17511100
Nonsense. The nature of these things automatically makes it so that there's esoteric and exoteric elements to every text. Reading Hermes won't make you an alchemist or something lol.

[Anonymous No.17511122]

>>17511080
Schizo tier bullshit, if we cant test, it cant exist, dissproved, and take your meds.

[Anonymous No.17511127]

>>17510973
The inherent badness of suffering is directly observable. If you think suffering is good, try burning your dick with a lighter and try telling me that suffering is good. Denying that suffering is inherently bad is just as delusional as denying that the sky is blue.

http://magnusvinding.blogspot.com/2014/04/the-basis-of-moral-realism.html

[Anonymous No.17511128]

>>17511122
Have you read Daniel Dennett tho?

[Anonymous No.17511137]

>>17511082
>the whole world is on my shoulders
>if only everyone did what I want Id be happy
>boo hoo my lyyyyyfe
>im healthy but oh the humanity!
imagine approaching middle age and still having teenage existential crises. literally grow up you fucking loser. do something difficult with yourself and try actually accomplishing something for once instead of constantly crying and worrying about everyone else's problems. nobody wants the kind of help that comes from someone that has never accomplished anything

[Anonymous No.17511140]

>>17511127
Nonsense. Suffering teaches you through warning, just as joy teaches you through positive reinforcement. My ancestors didn't eat poisonous plants to figure out whether they're edible just for me to give up on this time honoured tradition.

Risk it for the biscuit or kill yourself you dumb nigger.

[Anonymous No.17511143]

>>17511127
>suffering = physical pain
There's no way you're 31 and such a retard

[Anonymous No.17511145]

>>17511128
Dennett is an NPC

[Anonymous No.17511149]

>>17511145
He claims consciousness is a spook.

[Anonymous No.17511157]

>>17510956
You not reproducing won't accomplish much in the long run. The people who reproduce are ultimately those who will shape the future. Existence might also become tolerable eventually if wireheading becomes possible.

https://www.abolitionist.com/anti-natalism.html

>Benatar's policy prescription is untenable. Radical anti-natalism as a recipe for human extinction will fail because any predisposition to share that bias will be weeded out of the population. Radical anti-natalist ethics is self-defeating: there will always be selection pressure against its practitioners. Complications aside, any predisposition not to have children or to adopt is genetically maladaptive. On a personal level, the decision not to bring more suffering into the world and forgo having children is morally admirable. But voluntary childlessness or adoption is not a global solution to the problem of suffering.

>Yet how should rational moral agents behave if - hypothetically - some variant of Benatar's diagnosis as distinct from policy prescription was correct?

>In an era of biotechnology and unnatural selection, an alternative to anti-natalism is the world-wide adoption of genetically preprogrammed well-being. For there needn't be selection pressure against gradients of lifelong adaptive bliss - i.e. a radical recalibration of the hedonic treadmill. The only way to eradicate the biological substrates of unpleasantness - and thereby prevent the harm of Darwinian existence - is not vainly to champion life's eradication, but instead to ensure that sentient life is inherently blissful. More specifically, the impending reproductive revolution of designer babies is likely to witness intense selection pressure against the harmfulness-promoting adaptations that increased the inclusive fitness of our genes in the ancestral environment of adaptation. If we use biotechnology wisely, then gradients of genetically preprogrammed well-being can make all sentient life subjectively rewarding - indeed wonderful beyond the human imagination. So in common with "positive" utilitarians, the "negative" utilitarian would do better to argue for genetically preprogrammed superhappiness.

[Anonymous No.17511163]

>>17510956
Shut up anti-natalist.

[Anonymous No.17511165]

>>17511149
Because he's a P-zombie

[Anonymous No.17511176]

>>17511157
>using technology to breed the best consumers

I like it!

[Anonymous No.17511182]

>>17511145
>>17511165
>>17511128
>if i cant understand science then is bullshit

kek

[Anonymous No.17511196]

>>17511182
>science says that consciousness doesn't exist

[Anonymous No.17511201]

Jesus Christ what is this shillery lately.
Shouldn’t anyone who believes in this horse shit just off themselves? Or are you not doing it because the suffering might be worth it?

[Anonymous No.17511202]

>>17511196
Low IQ as fuck, go back to read your schizo post modernism and "occult" bullshiter bro, pity that you truly cant grasp how the wold work, cope more brainlet.

[Anonymous No.17511210]

>>17510956
>this thread again
Fuck off no one cares about your utilitarianism.

[Anonymous No.17511212]

>>17511201
> just kill your self bro!


>It is unethical to put people in a situation where the only escape is suicide and all of the pain, fear, guilt of leaving others behind, and more that comes with it. Not to mention the pain that precedes it that pushes people to this point in the first place. Also, many people are miserable but don’t commit suicide because they are afraid they will survive, fear the pain, don’t want to hurt others, social stigma, the survival instinct, etc. They never should have been put into this situation in the first place.Additionally, the idea that no more new people should be brought into existence does not necessarily imply by itself that people who have already been forced to exist should stop existing. A person who is currently alive may be happy with their life and want to continue living. However, it is still unethical to create someone else who might not feel the same way. Since there is no way to know how they will feel and no way to receive consent to take the risk, it is not morally justified to reproduce.Furthermore, people who are born may suffer but still be concerned about how their friends or family will react to a suicide. So even if they are miserable, they will not commit suicide and continue suffering for the sake of others. This does not mean they enjoy life or think it is worth the pain; they simply do not want to hurt others by committing suicide.


Cope more.

[Anonymous No.17511213]

>>17511140
You're conflating instrumental values with terminal values you absolute retard. It seems like survival/passing on your genes are your terminal values, and things like pain are just a means to an end. If it was possible for humans to survive and reproduce without the need for pain, would you still think it's a good thing?

[Anonymous No.17511223]

>>17511140
>From a strictly physical standpoint, however, survival cannot be judged better than extinction. "Survivalism" survives, however, because the ancestors of survivors survived. It is a classic bias of living organisms, whether it is rationalized or not. That the bioinconsistent organization of an organism does not completely fall into a reductionistic collapse (consistency with its environment) may be the definition of its survival.

[Anonymous No.17511227]

>>17510956
Someone kill op, according to his philosophy you’d be doing him a favor.

[Anonymous No.17511230]

>>17510992
Try Nietzsche

[Anonymous No.17511238]

>>17510956
If you don't breed, the Amish and Mormons will.

https://www.unz.com/akarlin/breeders-revenge/

>However, after five or so generations, the breeders (high fertility lifestyle, high fertility preferences) start expanding as a share of the population, slowly at first, but gaining in rapidity once the laws of exponential growth make themselves felt. On the above chart, the French, the Dutch, and the Anglo-Saxons might be around Generation #5. It is also at this stage that there emerge what we might call “breeder cults”, such as quiverfulls

>Moreover, in a few ethno-religious societies, such as the Amish and the Hasidim, the process is much further advanced, since many of the people less committed to their values – which include high fertility – have been getting “boiled off” into their neighboring societies with every passing generation

[Anonymous No.17511242]

“It’s better to exist and experience pleasure but suffer than not to exist at all”
That’s your opinion. You do not have the right to push that onto someone else who never consented to nor desired birth and will be the one who faces the consequences if the suffering outweighs the pleasure.

“I’m happy. How do you know my child won’t be happy?”
How do you know they will be happy? There is no guarantee that they will be satisfied with their lives. All of their suffering will ultimately be your fault. It is not up to you to take the gamble since you are not the one who will suffer the consequences and you never received consent to create them in the first place. Not to mention, unborn people have no desire to feel pleasure, so creating them creates that demand to feel happiness in the first place. Procreating can also take away resources from people who already exist and worsen their conditions as most people consume more resources than they produce in a lifetime. If you really care about helping people become happy, why not adopt? (see other Argument D)

“It’s impossible to receive consent”
If you can't get consent, the default answer is always no, such as how it is immoral to rape an unconscious or drunk person.
Natalist blow the fuck out

[Anonymous No.17511249]

>>17511202
>accepting the existence of consciousness makes you low IQ

[Anonymous No.17511250]

>>17511238
Don't care, I wont have children to go on living in such a shitty world, peace bro.

[Anonymous No.17511257]

>>17511249
>look bro, just believe in something that I believe even though I don't know to prove it or cant prove it to you, just trust me bro!

[Anonymous No.17511258]

>>17511213
Paasing on my genes is one of my terminal values, not the only one.
>If it was possible for humans to survive and reproduce without the need for pain, would you still think it's a good thing
If pain was truly useless then of course I wouldn't think it to be a good thing. But pain isn't useless. Both experiencing and inflicting pain have their uses that make them necessary tools.

>>17511223
That's a fair point, and yet (you) are surviving. Are you not? Therefore it is at best mindless wankery what you posted because it is clearly without actionable consequence.

[Anonymous No.17511263]

>>17511257
t. a literal machine

[Anonymous No.17511267]

>>17511258
Say that to a children born with a congenital cancer, yeah, suffering does have it uses, kek.

[Anonymous No.17511279]

>>17511263
>bro, I believe in things that I cant prove or know
to be real, and it does make sense in my head! Just trust me bro!

Your mind on postmodernism or occultism, just take your meds, schizo.

[Anonymous No.17511286]

>>17511212
Lol no cope here there’s not a doubt in my mind to have kids. Life is fucking great. How does he handle the whole evolution thing? Wouldn’t people come back into existence again?

[Anonymous No.17511289]

>>17511267
Have you firsthand experienced the trauma of having a child with a terminal disease? Was your brother perhaps a crack baby? How come most people haven't killed themselves yet? How come you haven't?

[Anonymous No.17511294]

>>17511279
>on postmodernism
Literally almost every philosophical tradition takes consciousness as a given you absolute imbecile. Consider reading a book, any book.

[Anonymous No.17511300]

>>17511122
By that logic, eternal oblivion is also untestable, so eternal oblivion also can't exist.

[Anonymous No.17511308]

>>17511294
>philosophy

Refuted by science

[Anonymous No.17511315]

>>17511308
Anti-natalism is philosophy. Unironically consider slitting your wrists.

[Anonymous No.17511317]

>>17511300
Yes.

[Anonymous No.17511340]

>>17511258
>Both experiencing and inflicting pain have their uses that make them necessary tools.
That's because you can't imagine anything with the same level of functionality as pain. Google David Pearce's idea of "gradients of bliss" as a potential replacement for pain. The reason why pain exists is the same reason why we have backwards retinas. Both were a result of evolution, but evolution is often not a good designer.

[Anonymous No.17511368]

>>17511340
>can't imagine anything with the same level of functionality as pain
But that's a wrong assumption on your part. Sometimes the carrot is necessary, sometimes the stick. Simple as

[Anonymous No.17511381]

>>17511242
>I don't care about anyone's happiness or pleasure. Now blow it out your ass anglo nigger

[Anonymous No.17511388]

>>17511308

[Anonymous No.17511391]

>>17511381
Butthurted

[Anonymous No.17511416]

>lits adores sad melancolhic literatura
>my diary desu
>im sad lit
>someone says that never being born is better than suffer
>nooooooooo you cant say that, jist kys yourself

Lit os full of schizos

[Anonymous No.17511426]

>>17511416
/lit/, like all of 4chud, is full of contrarian children

[Anonymous No.17511427]

>>17511038
>>17511089
>>17511137
>First, a pessimist straw man is built. The pessimist would be characterized by the following traits: he is deeply unhappy, hates himself and existence (p. 2), seems especially grumpy and incapable of any joy, is a desperate person (6), who adores the negative, death and everything that is connected with non-existence, that “makes nothingness positive” and turns it into a kind of divinity (21), which has his pessimistic attitude by personal problems to insert himself in life, among the happy people; an annoying bastard and killjoy, somewhat crazy (and possibly homosexual, especially if he speaks ill of procreation and fatherhood)...

Still within this first straw man strategy, it is curious that when an optimistic philosopher claims to have discovered something (for example, freedom, dignity of the human person, the eternal in man, etc.), it is considered that he has discovered something for humanity; but when the pessimist discovers something unpleasant (perverse infantile sexuality, mortality, structural pain), what he discovered_is valid only for him_ and not for humanity. Ever since I began to write on these issues, objections have almost always gone in this direction: “Pessimism is a personal, subjective and non-universalizable posture; you are like that, those are your personal characteristics and of many people as sick as you”; but I never hear any criticism of “subjectivity” when the results are beautiful. (Of course, this and other outrageous asymmetries are allowed to the optimist who, as MV says cheerfully, accepts reason only when it is convenient, but reserves the right to reject it when it is not).

[Anonymous No.17511465]

>>17511238
They're already being outpaced by Mexicans

[Anonymous No.17511489]

>>17511416
Really goes to prove that even when suffering, existing aint so bad

[Anonymous No.17511491]

>>17510956
easy, just don't be a consequentialist

simple as

[Anonymous No.17511590]

I'm a sperm donor child. There is no worse a thought than knowing you didn't come into being through some natural selective process but rather through a true genetic lottery. My mother didn't even see a picture of my father, it was completely random and it's no surprise I am a genetic abomination. They just skipped over the biological functions which motivate two humans to pro-create. My mother might have found my biological father horrible and vice versa. This is 100% the reason I am such fractured individual, they blended two people without any consideration of the slosh they were making.

Anyway end of blog post.

[Anonymous No.17511662]

>>17511127
Bro you are literally so fucking stupid you are refuted by Jordan B Peterson. Can you imagine that? Being so retarded that JBP refits you. I mean come on you fucking dumb faggot

[Anonymous No.17511689]

I love this schizo shit. It’s like it’s own Darwinian fitness test. Shout out to all you fucking weak minded autistic faggots that “refuse” to reproduce because of this antinatalist beta male shit. You really are doing us all a favor It’s already a shame that all the brace and heroic men have continuously died in war in the past. Now we have beta males taking themselves out of the game. It’s perfect. Make way faggots

[Anonymous No.17511732]

>>17511491
based. deontology and virtue refute antinatalism at their very foundation

[Anonymous No.17511761]

>>17511590

The manner in which you came into being is entirely natural. If women could, in a way that was tactful and permitted, look at a guy's "report card" of his height, IQ, how many women he's managed to sleep with, etc. you don't think they would and use that as a basis for selecting mates? Women go shopping for men, this has been the case in every culture without arranged marriages

[Anonymous No.17511773]

>>17511689
kek fucking this
>I'm too intelligent to further my bloodline. Natalists STILL can't refute!

[Anonymous No.17511798]

>>17510956
Has this nigga ever listened to music or had sex before?

[Anonymous No.17511803]

>>17511590
I'm gonna start donating sperm. Only way I can spread my genes at this point. Better start dropping loads before I get too fat

[Anonymous No.17511832]

>>17510956

[Anonymous No.17511833]

>>17511761
That didn't happen and it doesn't nullify the missing biological element which drives two individuals to pro-create. The human body knows best which partner will create the healthiest off spring and that is entirely a physical feeling based on sexual chemistry. When you skip that essential part you're just throwing a dart at a dart board with little consideration for the unnatural abomination you may be creating. It's no wonder sperm donor off spring are 2x more likely to have depression and drug addictions. There isn't a more selfish way to conceive a child.

[Anonymous No.17511834]

>>17511662
Jordan Peterson is evil and stupid. He has a daughter and says, “We are here to suffer so learn to suffer like a man.” A potential paradise could be like a never ending DMT trip with the constant pleasure level of heroin. If you get bored then it’s not paradise. There don’t even have to be human bodies. His is just a severe lack of imagination. And there is no sense in which suffering or mediocrity create meaning. All the meaning you need would be packaged into the paradise experience. But I am not experiencing such meaning and perhaps never will. That’s why despite the abundant grace and mercy I think I am not subject to a fully benevolent God. Perhaps God is like Jordan Peterson and I therefore consider him my enemy.

[Anonymous No.17511863]

>>17511491
>>17511732
Why shouldn't I be a consequentialist?

[Anonymous No.17511894]

>>17511590
>you didn't come into being through some natural selective process but rather through a true genetic lottery
Not anyone can be a sperm donor though. Sperm donors are hand picked to have top tier genetics. You can't even even donate sperm if you're shorter than 5'10". If you're a genetic abomination, you're either extremely unlucky, you're mom's genes are even shittier than yours, or the sperm bank your mom got sperm from sucks.

[Anonymous No.17511956]

>>17510956

[Anonymous No.17511976]

>>17510956
>TO. THIS.FUCKING.DAY. N O B O D Y. REFUTED THIS DUDE.

Imagine even bothering to read that.

[Anonymous No.17512022]

>>17511833

>The human body knows best which partner will create the healthiest off spring and that is entirely a physical feeling based on sexual chemistry

Proofs? Other 'soft' social selection processes aren't very good at what they're meant to do. Like job interviews are very bad at predicting competency and workplace success. And being social animals we're evolved to be good at judging the competency of others, probably better than judging ourselves. I would guess that a woman's intuition is at best moderately sound in judgement, and is dependent on things like intelligence and mental health, not "sexual chemistry" lmao.

[Anonymous No.17512028]

>>17511894
My biological father is an accomplished scientist. It means absolutely nothing when you skipped the biological functions which motivates two healthy individuals to procreate. Every naturally conceived individual is filtered by this phenomena. The idea that you can just skip over something so essential is extremely careless. Eugenics and selection based on arbitrary benchmarks will always be inferior to the human instinct. Just goes to show how arrogant the average human is to believe their personal biases know more than nature itself.

[Anonymous No.17512038]

>>17512028
So basically autists are genetically defective

[Anonymous No.17512040]

>>17510973
This, if you take suffering to be because of the world being a penitentiary

[Anonymous No.17512046]

>>17512028
>their personal biases know more than nature itself
Personal biases are a product of nature though, hence why hypergamy exists.

[Anonymous No.17512072]

>>17512046
>Hypergamy

Okay incel, that's enough from you.

[Anonymous No.17512073]

>>17512038

This is basically true. If you do manage to change course, most people (normies / women) will judge you incredibly harshly if they learn of you're past. It just is what it is

[Anonymous No.17512106]

>>17512028

It is true that sperm banks probably select for autists inadvertently. I would say like 15-30% of accomplished people in stem are obviously kind of spergy just from casual interaction, but they're never diagnosed because the past the IQ / luck filter that is elite universities in America, which separates rabble with conventional problems from the elite which have unconditional high status by virtue of their degree

[Anonymous No.17512115]

>>17512106

>the past

they pass*

[Anonymous No.17512221]

>>17512028
>Just trust You animal instict bro!

Holy fuck. The absoluto state

[Anonymous No.17512398]

>>17512221
Peak midwit: knowing more than god himself.

[Anonymous No.17512581]

>>17511834
Boo hoo

[Anonymous No.17512613]

>implying this soijack wasn't refuted more than a century before he was even spawned from his father's gunk

[Anonymous No.17512766]

>>17511127
If I were retarded enough to stick my dick in fire, the suffering WOULD be good for me because I would learn to never do that again. You have to deliberately have a brain aneurysm to not understand the point of "suffering is good."

[Anonymous No.17512808]

>>17512106
>>17511590
>>17512028
>>17511833
Pic related was conceived via IVF/sperm donation. He had a near-genius level IQ, despite his mother being a low IQ Mexican. He was also ripped. He was also an antinatalist with a lot of mental issues. He had severe depression and psychosis, and was involuntarily committed to a mental institution twice. He believed that this reality is a simulation, and that everyone is an NPC except for him. He ultimately committed suicide by drowning himself in Lake Michigan.

https://www.lakemchenryscanner.com/2020/04/16/missing-waukegan-man-found-dead-in-lake-michigan/

Here's his YouTube channel and blog:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeLURmm1ICIg46GkQpWOhIw/videos
https://vitrifyher.com/

[Anonymous No.17513092]

>>17512766
>not knowing the difference between something being good because of what results in and something being good in and of itself

[Anonymous No.17513111]

>>17511863
For all of the reasons you would learn from basic research into other ethical theories. Or for the obvious reason that consequentialism opens the way to such an obviously retarded and repugnant position as antinatalism.

[Anonymous No.17513154]

>>17513111
>to such an obviously retarded and repugnant position as antinatalism
>it's just obvious bro, I don't need an argument because it's obvious
>antinatalism and consequentialism are bad because they hurt my feelings

[Anonymous No.17513181]

>>17513154
Keep drinking the Koolaid, faggot. No one needs your seed anyways.

[Anonymous No.17513185]

>>17512808
Extremely sad story but not surprising at all. Sperm donation is an absolutely vile, heartless and dystopian industry. These sperm banks have little regard for the hybridised abominations they force into the world, most of which don't even know the story of their conception and spend their lives dislocated from conventional human experience until the day they end up like this young man. RIP.

[Anonymous No.17513206]

>>17513185

[Anonymous No.17513215]

>>17511072
whynotboth.jpg

[Anonymous No.17513245]

>>17511072
>or a gym pass
Tell that to pic related. He's a blackpill on how exercise doesn't cure depression.

https://vitrifyher.com/daily-workout-routine-and-diet/

[Anonymous No.17513259]

>>17513245
It's true though. Being ripped does nothing.

[Anonymous No.17513282]

>>17513185
It's possible the sperm donation process could be improved so that the children produced by it don't turn into fuckups. Like by not allowing autists to donate sperm.

[Anonymous No.17513289]

>>17510956
it's refuted by the fact that you and the author havent killed yourselves yet

[Anonymous No.17513296]

>>17510956
NoBoDY ReFUtEd ThIS DudE

[Anonymous No.17513337]

>>17513289
>>17511201
>>17511105
>This is not to offer a general recommendation of suicide. Suicide, like death from other causes, makes the lives of those who are bereaved much worse. Rushing into one's own suicide can have profound negative impact on the lives of those close to one. Although an Epicurean may be committed to not caring about what happens after his death, it is still the case that the bereaved suffer a harm even if the deceased does not. That suicide harms those who are thereby bereaved is part of the tragedy of coming into existence. We find ourselves in a kind of trap. We have already come into existence. To end our existence causes immense pain to those we love and for whom we care. Potential procreators would do well to consider this trap they lay when they produce offspring.

[Anonymous No.17513801]

>>17512808
Do you happen to have a link to where he talks about being a donor conceived child?

[Anonymous No.17513820]

>>17513337
Yeah but i dont give a fuck if they suffer, suicide is the best answer

[Anonymous No.17513825]

>>17510956
im going to kill myself when i get the right tools, right now i cant , some nembutal or sodium azide is all i need

[Anonymous No.17513827]

>>17510956
Considering suffering and pleasure as a binary sum collected over the course of a lifetime doesn't make sense.

[Anonymous No.17513844]

>>17513827
why?

[Anonymous No.17513853]

>>17510956
This dude is right but mammals instinct to reproduction are so strong that 90% of people will have children and will not be convinced by logic arguments so yes, suffering is inevitable and nobody will prevent it ever

[Anonymous No.17513896]

>>17513844
Only the present moment exists. All the pleasure you've ever felt in your past doesn't matter if you are suffering right now, but the reverse is equally true. You don't collect it and keep it in a little jar or something.

[Anonymous No.17513899]

>>17513896
yeah but you remember it, it is the same

[Anonymous No.17513906]

>>17513899
Memories aren't the same.

[Anonymous No.17513911]

>>17513906
ok, now go fuck and have children

[Anonymous No.17513921]

>>17513801
He mentions it in this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pno6Ir_nDAQ

And in this article:
https://beyondhighbrow.com/2018/05/31/the-intelligence-of-hispanics/

>As a half-Hispanic raised with Hispanics, I mostly agree with this. My Mexican mother who immigrated illegally to the US paid tens of thousands for in-vitro fertilization, and that’s what pulled me out the ditch. This was evidently high-quality sperm because I still managed to turn out above average.

> The people around me were impressed that I actually liked to read and learn. When I was young, the other Hispanics were amused that I could memorize the times tables and recite miscellanea about science and history, besides being capable of drawing dragons properly.

> To give you context, my mother has been living in the US for over 25 years, and still does not understand a drop of English. They have a culture which consists of strong work-ethic (never missing a day of work and so on) followed by self-induced brain death post 9-to-5. They just watch mindless television and do not learn.

> I discovered my own origins at the age of ten. I also achieved standard atheism at the age of nine (which I consider a standard benchmark for the ability to display rudimentary acts of rationality.) Then it took me years of hard work to unwire all the Catholic stupidity in my mother’s brain. This culture has no concept of logical reasoning, so her mind kept swinging in repetitive loops whenever I tried to carefully and methodically pin her down to the implications of specific arguments.

> I succeeded in that endeavor, and am now in the process of teaching her where she is actually standing by explaining the crucial insights of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. People may laugh at the fact that she didn’t know the Earth was a sphere orbiting the sun, but yet most ‘educated’ humans alive today are just as ignorant about reality. For example, by not knowing that there is no universal now sweeping forward, or by holding the belief that we are made of little billiard ball particles bouncing around.

> In my experience, whites at least fake like they want to learn. They’ll say “Oh yeah, that’s cool. Schrodinger’s cat is dead and alive… lol… because it’s all probabilistic, hur dur” or something. Of course, they don’t know jack-shit and also prefer to consume mindless media, but their culture says it’s okay to be smart. Hispanics just don’t give a shit. A lack of intellectual culture is their biggest setback.

> The ghetto lower-middle income schools I went to were torture. The kids couldn’t do basic algebra; the teachers were underachieving whites who couldn’t get higher paying jobs in other districts or who preferred having less responsibility because black and hispanic parents wouldn’t bitch to them about grades, or have any expectations whatsoever really. And the teachers made no secret about this, they outright told us this was the reason.

[Anonymous No.17513927]

>>17513911
I don't want children but I also think antinatalism is dumb.

[Anonymous No.17513948]

>>17513927
nah, ultra based

[Anonymous No.17513956]

>>17513927
This. My genes are shit and should not be passed on, but trying to promote antinatalism is futile.

[Anonymous No.17513961]

>>17513956
well yes, animal instinct >>>>>> human "rationality"

[Anonymous No.17513962]

>>17513853
>and nobody will prevent it ever
Unless someone figures out how to kill off the entire population.

[Anonymous No.17513967]

>>17513962
ultra based AI

[Anonymous No.17513970]

>>17510956
Holy fucking shit you’re back

[Anonymous No.17514036]

>>17513921
This guy is incredibly interesting.

[Anonymous No.17514134]

>>17513801
>>17514036
He also mentions it in this supposedly fictional, but seemingly autobiographical story about a character who seems to be based on himself.

https://vitrifyher.com/2018/09/27/the-schizoid-aspie-who-discovered-the-secrets-of-the-multiverse-with-the-internet/

>And that’s all very interesting. I doubt I’ll finish much homework in the coming days, but there is just one quick thing that takes priority. I need to look at these DNA results.

>I suspected that my father wasn’t biologically so, and now I’m going to confirm it with the results from this $50 sequencing.

>Yes. I knew it. I’m not surprised. She is not a slut and she was not raped either. She probably just went and got in vitro fertilization. Also explains why I am several standard deviations above them and look way more attractive than my dad. Those screening processes can really lift a baby out the ditch. I really wonder why China hasn’t started a eugenics arms race already.

[Anonymous No.17514358]

>>17510992

[Anonymous No.17514363]

>>17513337
this is just a faggot version of camus, fuck you

[Anonymous No.17514707]

>>17510956
how do you speak so clearly with all those cocks down your throat?

[Anonymous No.17514714]

>>17510984
>Besides that I haven't see a good arguments
you ignored each one down to when people showed you sillogysms that reduce to "you are retarded"
You're litteraly worse than Gorgias.

[Anonymous No.17514716]

>>17510956
Your existence refutes it. Being the hypocrite that you are you didn't follow the supposed convictions you espouse and haven't killed yourself yet.

[Anonymous No.17514792]

>>17513245
>that
>ripped
choose one
you can get this body in half year doing nothing

[Anonymous No.17514837]

>>17511388
lmao complete hacks

[Anonymous No.17514838]

>>17513206
How do you refute this?

[Anonymous No.17514879]

>>17511140

Suffering bodily harm are only loosely correlated.

[Anonymous No.17514885]

>>17511368

You are an animal.

[Anonymous No.17514900]

>>17513206
my god the edge. oof

[Anonymous No.17514904]

>>17511157
>readily admitting that existence is intolerable
>still thinking that life is contingent on birth

The ABSOLUTE state!

[Anonymous No.17514907]

>>17510956
>Suffering is bad
fucking prove it.

[Anonymous No.17514919]

>>17510956
>It is possible to judge life as being worthless through its own lens
See a therapist

[Anonymous No.17514932]

The presupposition of "suffering is obviously bad" is not objective. I think it rests on a certain type of subjectivity, which is sensitive to pain and suffering in general, so for it the whole world appears as toxic and harmful. Most people are capable of digesting hardships, overcoming them, some are not and then they universalize their condition. It results in pessimism and antinatalism.

[Anonymous No.17514952]

>>17511317
I don't think posting star wars the old republic screenshots will help your point friend, but I do agree

[Anonymous No.17514957]

>>17514932

Suffering implicitly means that which one cannot "digest" or "overcome", regardless of what it is.

[Anonymous No.17514963]

>>17514957
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/suffering

[Anonymous No.17514972]

>>17510956
This fucking thread again, it's always the same
>Explain why I shouldn't kill myself without using any of the arguments that explain why I shouldn't kill myself
Just fucking do it.

[Anonymous No.17514981]

>>17514957
not really. That's the main thing, some people event want to suffer. Totalitarian societies of XX century were built on the idea that a man can overcome his suffering for the greater good. They thought japanese children from the small age to discipline their pain and suffering so when the time comes they can sacrifice themselves without a blink. Suffering as something you cant overcome is a historical product which is the result of the loss of grand narratives.

[Anonymous No.17514986]

>>17514963

I mean in a strictly Philosophical context.

[Anonymous No.17515002]

>>17513206
Fucking hell, a pessimistic high IQ schizo outcast would have right in between us. Fuck redditors man.
/lit/ would have saved him.

[Anonymous No.17515006]

>>17514981

Your point being? My argument is that there is something any and every one cannot overcome, and that that is the definition of suffering in the Philosophical context.

[Anonymous No.17515009]

>>17514986
You mean you just made up some shit to try and sidestep being proved wrong.

[Anonymous No.17515012]

>>17513206
faggot should have read Nietzsche

[Anonymous No.17515015]

>>17514919
Psychiatry is a contemporary religion which protects the status quo.

[Anonymous No.17515029]

>>17515012
I blame reddit who only exposed him to analytical bugmen bullshit.
I have felt so fucking sad when one commenter suggested his thought is similar to hermeticism and he said that this makes him angry that he can't learn everything.

[Anonymous No.17515033]

>>17514838
By not holding (negative) utilitarianism as the highest moral ideal. Read Nietzsche

[Anonymous No.17515035]

>>17515006
your notion of suffering is weird then. Where does it stem from? Because from experience everyone can tell that most of suffering in life is bearable. We are not talking about extreme cases here (neither do pessimists or antinatalists build their arguments on the extreme suffering cases). My point is that suffering is not objective, it has to be subjectivized trough the body. And some bodies are strogner than others. Some people digest suffering better than others. The latter group of people are weak and when they philosophize they universalize their weakness. Your abstract notion of suffering is really just a product of bad digestion.

[Anonymous No.17515042]

>>17515009

This definition is implicit to this particular Philosophical scope and to Philosophy in general, unless stated otherwise. Philosophical definition are more often than not distinct from dictionary definitions. That you though it simply means you stubbing your toe or running out of weed only reveals your own vulgarity.

[Anonymous No.17515049]

Just fuciking cope after cope, damn

[Anonymous No.17515055]

>>17513961
Kelly yourself monkey

[Anonymous No.17515058]

>>17515002
He posted on /sci/

[Anonymous No.17515062]

>>17513296
>i dont have an argument so i gonna post some ironic image

Low IQ move as fuck

[Anonymous No.17515066]

>>17515058
>giving attention to a schizo

Kek

[Anonymous No.17515067]

>>17515035

It is irrelevant where one's threshold is. Though the content of the weak one's and the strong one's suffering may vary, the form of their suffering, i.e. there being a threshold, is identical.

[Anonymous No.17515108]

>>17515067
>It is irrelevant where one's threshold is...
it is, since it creates two very different relations to suffering.
>Though the content of the weak one's and the strong one's suffering may vary
its not the content that varies, it can be the same. Different are the ways they deal with it. Or as Ernst Junger said "tell me your relationship with pain and I'll tell you who you are"
>there being a threshold, is identical.
no, some people have no threshold. Empirically wrong statement and conceptually irrelevant to what is at stake with pessimism and aninatalism

[Anonymous No.17515124]

>>17515058
/sci/ is still closer to analytical tradition. /lit/ is way more interesting.

>>17515066
You are retard who doesn't understand 4chan sincerity. When anon call other people schizo or autistic they mean it as a compliment under multi layered irony. Spergs and schizo makes 4chan unique and not your typical tourist normalfags. Schizojak was a accomplished philosopher and /lit/ gave him the attention.

[Anonymous No.17515126]

>>17515124
Schizo cope

[Anonymous No.17515130]

>>17515066
He’s not just a schizo, he clearly had a genius level IQ. Reading through his blog, it’s obvious he had serious insights. There’s such thing as being too intelligent; theres also a point on the spectrum of human knowledge in which you enter the cave and never return.

[Anonymous No.17515153]

>>17515015
Oh. You're a faggot.

[Anonymous No.17515158]

>>17515042
Words words words. Just admit you were backpedalling then fuck off.

[Anonymous No.17515193]

>>17515108

No, the relations to suffering are identical in there being surmountable and insurmountable things for each and every one, regardless of what they are. Your second point is grammatically incoherent. No, there is no one with no threshold. Prove me wrong.

[Anonymous No.17515198]

>>17515158

Your functional illiteracy is, likewise, nothing to be proud of.

[Anonymous No.17515293]

>>17515193
>No, there is no one with no threshold. Prove me wrong.
christians who were tortured and didnt renounce their faith till the very end, self-immolation rituals, torture victims of nazism and soviet communism that went to the very end etc etc.
>Your second point is grammatically incoherent.
because you cant understand that subjective-historical approach to suffering is more fundamental than there being a threshold (which is false anyway).

Let's assume there is an objective threshold of suffering. What does it change? Most of people are not getting tortured, they dont have unbearable physical conditions, so the assertion of threshold isnt relevant, since pessimism and antinatalism talks about there being more unpleasure than pleasure, therefore more suffering (which is something to be avoided) and there being a lot of extreme unbearable cases of suffering.

[Anonymous No.17515303]

>>17515293

"and not there being a lot of extreme unbearable cases of suffering which would be subsumed under the main argument, but not the accent of it"*

[Anonymous No.17515375]

>>17515293

What does dying have to do with any of this? By "threshold" I mean the point past which one can no longer stop suffering, neither in the short nor long term, that he can or cannot continue living is another point altogether. But to answer in the vulgar scope of your example: it could simply be that said people were not subjected to the kind of suffering they were vulnerable to, that the Christians would have yielded to tickling, that the monks would not dare drown themselves, or that the political victims could not bare cross-dressing. Regardless, this is a tangential, not to mention double or even triple-dipped, point. As to your last point, I think it is Morally wrong to subject anyone to such a state of affairs, especially given the asymmetry of there being no similar threshold of joy.

[Anonymous No.17515391]

>>17515293

What does dying have to do with any of this? By "threshold" I mean the point past which one can no longer stop suffering, neither in the short nor long term, that he can or cannot continue living is another point altogether. But to answer in the vulgar scope of your example: it could simply be that said people were not subjected to the kind of suffering they were vulnerable to, that the Christians would have yielded to tickling, that the monks would not dare drown themselves, or that the political victims could not bear cross-dressing. Regardless, this is a tangential, not to mention double or even triple-dipped, point. As to your last point, I think it is Morally wrong to subject anyone to such a state of affairs, especially given the asymmetry of there being no similar threshold of joy.

[Anonymous No.17515411]

>>17510956
>booooo hoooooo why mom and dad made me, i didn' want to exiiiist
This is such a ridiculous first world """problem""". I bet no hard working famer thoug shit like this ever.
Sometimes, your life is so easy you just have to make up problems, just to have some fun. Thats when you know you should lift weights.

[Anonymous No.17515422]

>>17515375
>What does dying have to do with any of this?
I thought by the "threshold" you meant a point after which the sufferer can not bare the suffering anymore and looks for a way to stop it by any means. Those example show that even in the cases of extreme pain and suffering that leads to death there were no such thresholds.
>By "threshold" I mean the point past which one can no longer stop suffering, neither in the short nor long term, that he can or cannot continue living is another point altogether.
Its a vague definition, because for pessimists and antinatalists you cant stop suffering since birth, so the threshold would be really just you being born. I think you're just moving goalposts with those hot definitions.

Maybe you think I'm talking about some people that can eliminate suffering? Thats not my point. Suffering is inherent to life and we suffer all of the time. My point is that strong people can subordinate and discipline their suffering. How does your worldview account for vast amount of people who can deal with suffering? Why does your worldview automatically stem from the weak person's perspective for whom suffering is inherently bad?

[Anonymous No.17515459]

>>17515422
>Those example show that even in the cases of extreme pain and suffering that leads to death there were no such thresholds.

Did you read my previous reply? I explicitly said that severity of suffering unto death is irrelevant to my point.

>it could simply be that said people were not subjected to the kind of suffering they were vulnerable to, that the Christians would have yielded to tickling, that the monks would not dare drown themselves, or that the political victims could not bear cross-dressing.

What the fuck are even saying? Babbling in circles about nonsense and asking shit I've already answered.

[Anonymous No.17515473]

>>17515422
>Why does your worldview automatically stem from the weak person's perspective for whom suffering is inherently bad?

LOOK AT THIS SHIT! Why would one "subordinate and discipline" it if it was good? Stupid bitch. Stop posting.

[Anonymous No.17515486]

>>17515198
>words words words
Thank you for admitting it.

[Anonymous No.17515492]

>>17515459
I should have just stopped at the point when you started talking about thresholds, which is irrelevant to the problems we were discussing since it deals with extreme cases. Extreme cases are only a small portion of our everyday life and suffering in general (still, in another place you say threshold is a point after which you can not stop suffering, which is weakest definition of a word currently on this site probably). And if you really think crossdressing and tickling can be more unbearable than extreme physical torture then I dont know what to say anymore.
>>17515473
I'm not saying its either good or bad you brainlet anglo moralfag frog that can only think in dichotomies of vague moral sentiments

[Anonymous No.17515505]

>>17515492

You are terminally idiotic. You have said nothing Logically substantial, there is not a single subject and predicate expressing anything meaningful whatsoever in any of your shitty replies.

I'm pretty sure you're this retard: >>/lit/thread/S17077203#p17098701 . Meandering for hours saying FUCKING NOTHING. Eat shit.

[Anonymous No.17515506]

>>17515411
>bro, just suffer! it's good for you!

So cut your balls off, retard.

[Anonymous No.17515513]

>>17515505
Man, you just have your attention span and reading comprehension fried by 4chan, you should just take a break
>i'm pretty sure you're this retard
lol you are a paranoiac too

[Anonymous No.17515639]

>>17510956
What is his thesis. I'll refute him

[Anonymous No.17515706]

>average /lit/ thread: i'm sad /lit/, recommend books for sad and suffering life, /lit/, give me doomer core charts /lit/, my diary desu
>anon says that maybe is not that good to put another life in this world because most surely will suffer
>/lit/ go "nooooooooooooooooooooo, you cant do that, my sufferino is good, is worthy to have depression, your coping kys"

Why? Is the average /lit/ poster capable of logic and rationality?

[Anonymous No.17515730]

>>17510956
This book and any antinatalist argument whatsoever rests on the absurd assumption that existence can be prevented. This is obviously false, as there is no magic place outside of existence that can be accessed. There is no nothing. The idea that you shouldn't have kids rests on the assumption that you are depriving the "non-existent" kids of their non-existence, when you birth them. This is absurd, as you effectively have to invoke child souls floating around within nothingness, waiting to be dragged into a body full of suffering, every time you make such an argument, which is obviously baseless non-empirical essentialist philosophy. In truth there is only reality(or realities) and there is no way of escaping it. To say nothing is a possible state or place is the same as to believe christian heaven is a place or state that is accesible. Both are wrong positions, there is only the ever-changing quantum field of existence, which you are occupying right now, and which you will occupy for eternity.

[Anonymous No.17515739]

>>17515730
cope

[Anonymous No.17515745]

>>17510956
Life can be kinda suffering, but it’s also kinda beautiful, you just move over and through suffering to get to the beautiful. It’s yin and yang shit
Consider yourself refuted and bodied, Mr Beantard

[Anonymous No.17515749]

>>17515706
These are faggots

[Anonymous No.17515757]

>>17510956

I don't know why people shill this book of his. The Human Predicament is certainly much better articulated. That one actually poses a pretty weak argument. Namely, he deals in personal/particulars and absolutely forsakes the existence of environment/contextual variables (i.e other people are likely not gonna stop fucking and invalidating your utilitarian approach because humans are not actually good utility maximizers).

In later books, however, he does get into more collective forms of his argument which are far more appropriate. Better Never to Have Been is perfect for angsty individuals who are unable to see themselves under the light of existing alongside other people, I'll give him that.

[Anonymous No.17515897]

>it's yet another anti-natalist cock suck-offery thread

[Anonymous No.17515917]

>>17510956

Wrong
Daoism has refuted everything even things that don't exist yet

[Anonymous No.17516020]

>>17510956
>Things are subjectively bad because of my existence
Cringe and spooked. Go back to Hot Topic and kill yourself, spookmonger. My life is mine, all my suffering is actually the antithesis of my life. I fight and defeat my physical pain, I conquer my mental pain, and I create my own pleasure. I make my life beautiful and without suffering.

[Anonymous No.17516062]

Opportunity is better than no opportunity.

[Anonymous No.17516079]

>>17515730

If this is true then not only does anti-natalism become mandatory but so does omnicide. We should not negotiate with Ontological terrorism.

[Anonymous No.17516186]

[Anonymous No.17516273]

>>17516186
Kek, this makes the natalist seethe

[Anonymous No.17516279]

>>17510956
>FUCK YOU DAD I DIDN'T ASK TO BE BORN

[Anonymous No.17516300]

I think that antinatalist are truly the most humanist of all, they truly treasure life and people so much that they consider putting someone on this world to be a sinful and evil, because any suffering is suffer, as they see, no one deserve suffering at all, no matter the size or scope of suffering, David Benatar after reading his books seems a very gentle soul and truly treasure a good life, so yeah, antinatalist have extremly good points overall, only does truly in denial can't see the logic of Benetar.

[Anonymous No.17516318]

>>17510956
>Oy vey don't have children goy

[Anonymous No.17516332]

>>17516318
Cope.
Antinatalism is an ancient philosophy.

[Anonymous No.17516352]

>>17511773
You may say this smugly, but it is a fact that high IQ individuals have fewer children than low IQ individuals. One of the greatest middle fingers that life has given the human race IMO.

[Anonymous No.17516356]

>>17516332
Ah yes, the ancient philosophy of not-procreating.

[Anonymous No.17516380]

The philosophy of sensitive bitches.

[Anonymous No.17516387]

>>17515730
This. Based(except for the quantum field part)

[Anonymous No.17516394]

>>17516356
I am not meme'ing. This philosophy is as ancient as humanity and religion.

>>"You, most blessed and happiest among humans, may well consider those blessed and happiest who have departed this life before you, and thus you may consider it unlawful, indeed blasphemous, to speak anything ill or false of them, since they now have been transformed into a better and more refined nature. This thought is indeed so old that the one who first uttered it is no longer known; it has been passed down to us from eternity, and hence doubtless it is true. Moreover, you know what is so often said and passes for a trite expression. What is that, he asked? He answered: It is best not to be born at all; and next to that, it is better to die than to live; and this is confirmed even by divine testimony. Pertinently to this they say that Midas, after hunting, asked his captive Silenus somewhat urgently, what was the most desirable thing among humankind. At first he could offer no response, and was obstinately silent. At length, when Midas would not stop plaguing him, he erupted with these words, though very unwillingly: 'you, seed of an evil genius and precarious offspring of hard fortune, whose life is but for a day, why do you compel me to tell you those things of which it is better you should remain ignorant? For he lives with the least worry who knows not his misfortune; but for humans, the best for them is not to be born at all, not to partake of nature's excellence; not to be is best, for both sexes. This should be our choice, if choice we have; and the next to this is, when we are born, to die as soon as we can.' It is plain therefore, that he declared the condition of the dead to be better than that of the living."

– Aristotle, Eudemus (354 BCE)

[Anonymous No.17516407]

>>17516356

Yes.

[Anonymous No.17516423]

>>17516394
Nice.

[Anonymous No.17516429]

>>17516356

Yes. More to the point that Catholic-Darwinian History is wrong, that the further into the past you look the LESS you see the alleged "primitive man".

[Anonymous No.17516430]

>>17516387
Why people seethe so much with idea that maybe, just maybe, bring someone to this world is not a very good idea? What the problem with people here?

[Anonymous No.17516436]

Benatar's asymmetry argument is false. Just as there is no one to benefit by bringing them into existence, there is no one to benefit by not bringing them into existence. Simple as.

[Anonymous No.17516438]

Hmm... bros?

[Anonymous No.17516443]

>>17516436
Holy fuck, are you dumb?

[Anonymous No.17516446]

>>17516356
>For, behold, the days are coming, in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the paps which never gave suck.

[Anonymous No.17516464]

>>17510956
>TO. THIS.FUCKING.DAY. N O B O D Y. REFUTED THIS DUDE.
Kevin Solway did.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkkJ4HztuQ0

[Anonymous No.17516467]

>/lit/ says: read the bible! just read the bible fag

>Again I looked, and I considered all the oppression taking place under the sun. I saw the tears of the oppressed, and they had no comforter; the power lay in the hands of their oppressors, and there was no comforter. 2So I admired the dead, who had already died, above the living, who are still alive. 3But better than both is he who has not yet existed, who has not seen the evil that is done under the sun. Ecclesiastes 4:2


The mental gymnastic that people do is borderline insane.

[Anonymous No.17516475]

>>17516443
Your dysfunctional emotions are clouding your reasoning.

Benatar makes a very specific moral assymmetry argument. His premises are that the absence of pain is good, in the moral sense, and that the absence of pleasure (or well-being, or any general "positive" affect) is neither good nor bad. He claims that a future without positive human experiences is not bad because there exists no one to be deprived of those experiences. He claims that a future without negative human experiences is good, because no one is suffering. But this asymmetry is nonsense. He is correct that a non-existent person cannot be deprived of positive experiences, but he is very obviously incorrect when he avoids applying that same logic to the benefit of preventing pain. The truth is that non-existent persons can neither be deprived nor benefited. The absence of pain is not good in exactly the same way that the absence of pleasure is not bad.

[Anonymous No.17516488]

>>17516475
no existence = no pain or good = net zero.

[Anonymous No.17516494]

>>17516464
>some random dude on youtube disprove a professional philosopher

jej

[Anonymous No.17516496]

>>17516438
There is no death. Reality cannot end
as this anon >>17515730 says

[Anonymous No.17516498]

>>17516436
> you

[Anonymous No.17516501]

>>17516467
>>17516446
>>17516394

I doubt you would be persuaded by someone posting quotes from the Bible and ancient philosophers about how life is good. Yet you do expect it to persuade others of your position.

[Anonymous No.17516504]

[Anonymous No.17516508]

>>17516501
Define good

[Anonymous No.17516513]

>>17516488
I agree with you, but you disagree with Benatar, who claims that it is actually good.

[Anonymous No.17516516]

>>17516501
Just post it thoses quote, bro, Im open to read about it.

[Anonymous No.17516528]

>>17516488
Is "no existence"even possible? Prove the existance of "no existance". This refutes Benatar

[Anonymous No.17516539]

>>17516501
I have been shilling this >>17516394 from sometime to deboonk the idiots who say that antinatalism or promortalism is a jewish conspiracy or new a philosophy.

[Anonymous No.17516542]

>>17516464

[Anonymous No.17516544]

>>17511388

I think I woud punch Krauss if I could.
I'd take the charge. I'd claim guilty.

[Anonymous No.17516547]

>>17516513
Its good from our point of view, because is net zero from all possible children that would come to this world. non-existence = zero probability of good or evil, baby don't exist, it doesn't suffer.

>b-but you cant say that, it doesn't make sense, how could you give value to a being that doesn't exist, who are you to make that assumption?

Life its a game, if do play it, you can't lose. If I don't bring a baby to these world, he cant suffer or have good, because he don't exist, as I'm alive I can make those points and assumptions.

[Anonymous No.17516551]

>>17516528
disprove the non-existence. this refutes your statement.

[Anonymous No.17516555]

>>17516528
Bullshit, you're play semantics here, you know that not being = net zero = don't suffer or have pleasure, stop being a semantic bitch, it makes you seems pedantic and dumb.

[Anonymous No.17516561]

>>17516501

I merely want to emphasize that it is indeed an ancient, nay, perennial Philosophy.

[Anonymous No.17516572]

>>17516547
>Its good from our point of view

Literally what is this supposed to mean? Benatar's argument is that it is *objectively good*--that it has a specific, true moral valence. You obviously haven't read what he wrote and don't agree with his arguments.

[Anonymous No.17516582]

>>17516551
>this refutes your statement
This is your opinion, not an argument.
>disprove the non-existence
There is no"nothing" by definition. Nothing cannot exist. There is no"nothing".This disproves the existence of "non-existence".

[Anonymous No.17516595]

>>17516582
what do you remember before you were born?
yeah that state is cool.

every antinatalist is an aristocrat who is nostalgic for the time before time.

[Anonymous No.17516611]

>>17516572
Dude, the baby doesn't exist, is a moot point, we know that being alive can be suffering, so it's good for a potential live to not have being.

[Anonymous No.17516617]

>>17516595
>you remember before you were born
Dishonest. There is no state before you were born. No one remembers it as they only remember "existence",not "non existence".

[Anonymous No.17516636]

>>17516611
>The baby doesn't exist, is a moot point, we know that being alive can be suffering, so it's good for a potential live to not have being.

This statement is equivalent in logical structure to:

>The baby doesn't exist, is a moot point, we know that being alive can be pleasant, so it's good for a potential live to come into existence

Without Benatar's asymmetry argument, you either have to demonstrate empirically that the child's life will be, on the whole, negative, or you have to accept that natalism is morally equivalent to anti-natalism.

[Anonymous No.17516637]

>>17516555
>existence is bad because there is suffering

The opposite can be true. "non existence"is bad as there is no pleasure.

[Anonymous No.17516641]

>>17516617
keep coping
everything is already a singularity, the "I" is an abnormality.

[Anonymous No.17516682]

>>17516641
>keep coping
Kys if you truely believe "non existence" ( reminder that you are unable to prove the existence of" non existence") is better than existence. You believe that non existence is bad as there is no pleasure.

[Anonymous No.17516725]

>nooo you cant be evil and just bring children into this horrible existence
yes I can

[Anonymous No.17516726]

proactively refuted by Jesus Christ

[Anonymous No.17516728]

>>17516725
Based

[Anonymous No.17516767]

>>17516682
Nah brah I don't really hate existence it think it is unnecessary.

[Anonymous No.17516768]

>>17510956
>read the title

>coming into existence
From where do you come into "existence"? From "non existence"?

[Anonymous No.17516770]

>>17510956
>ITT:
Anons coping with their mortality through symbolic means. Stop it, there are better ways than to bring another being to the circus.

[Anonymous No.17516777]

>>17516726
Proved by based Mani.

[Anonymous No.17516781]

>>17516768

From God.

[Anonymous No.17516808]

>>17510956
Plenty of people on this board have presented good arguments against Benatar, but if you're looking for criticisms of academic literature, why the fuck do you keep posting about this on 4chan and not look up reviews by other academics and articles responding to Benatar? Declaring victory because random idiots can't refute your idea is the epitome of internet pseudo-intellectualism.

[Anonymous No.17516812]

>>17516781
Based. This refutes the book. There is no"non existance"

[Anonymous No.17516827]

>>17516808
>cant refute
When?

[Anonymous No.17516839]

>>17516770
Refutation of "denial of death"

1.The book fails to prove the existence of death(to (you),not to outside observers).
Only assumes the existance of death(to you)

2.
It is not the denial of "death", but the fear of change or suffering. Suffering is caused by the "desire"to satisfy the ego.
Death is seen as bad because only the weak dies, and "weakness", weakens the ego. It is only the desire to strengthen the ego.

3.Death(non "experience")does not exist.
Death does not effect us because we must always exist. It is impossible for us to not" exist"as everything is contained inside existance.

[Anonymous No.17516849]

>>17516839
Woah pack it up beckerbros. it's over.

[Anonymous No.17516902]

>>17516839
What a elaborate cope anon

[Anonymous No.17516988]

>>17510956
>Harm
You are an amoeba crawling on a glob of snot in a cosmic explosion thinking you're the center of it all
Nothing you do causes harm, much less has any meaning or importance whatsoever

[Anonymous No.17516994]

>>17516770
>>17516192

[Anonymous No.17517011]

[Anonymous No.17517018]

>>17517011
?

[Anonymous No.17517031]

>>17511163
>this is a fetish now
where did everything go so wrong?

[Anonymous No.17517033]

>>17517018
>?
Astrophysics black guy

[Anonymous No.17517056]

>>17515411
>This is such a ridiculous first world """problem""". I bet no hard working famer thoug shit like this ever.
Yes. Threads like this make me despise First Worlders and want Intellectuals to get stabbed.

[Anonymous No.17517060]

>>17516332
It true: jews are an ancient menace.

[Anonymous No.17517068]

>>17510956
Antinatlism is probably the single most easy philosophy to refute. It gets btfo hard here all the damn time.

[Anonymous No.17517139]

>>17511201
>Shouldn’t anyone who believes in this horse shit just off themselves?
Logically they should, but they never do and start coping. "W-well since I'm here..." hilariously self-refuting everything they stand for.
It's all just an excuse to not have kids anyway, which is fine I suppose, but don't be an utter teenage edgelord faggot about it.

[Anonymous No.17517287]

>>17515130
Well if he truly had such a high iq he could’ve easily just contributed in a science field like Einstein. Probably just making that part up to justify his decision

[Anonymous No.17517321]

>>17517287
Why contribute to science?

[Anonymous No.17517328]

>>17517139
Yea there’s no reasoning your way past suicide at that point. OP keeps accusing natalists of mental gymnastics when he’s doin some Olympic Gold Medal somersaulting to avoid killing himself.

[Anonymous No.17517330]

>>17510956
based autist

[Anonymous No.17517337]

>>17511107
>we all want our consciousness to be preserved
source

[Anonymous No.17517355]

>>17511127
>denying the sky is blue
I deny the sky is blue. Because it isn't. A great analogy because just as the sky appears blue to brainlets, suffering also appears bad to mental midgets.

[Anonymous No.17517365]

>>17517321
So you don’t end up a sad basedboy whining on the antinatalist subreddit everyday about how much you hate your parents. Seriously that’s the entire fucking sub.

[Anonymous No.17517378]

>>17517330
Thanks for the keks anon, perhaps antinatalism is based.
Im still going to produce offspring because Im not a moral autist, and I want somebody to spout my pseudo philosophy to.

[Anonymous No.17517395]

>>17517330
>"If you were at the theatre next to me I would get up and leave faggot'.

[Anonymous No.17517418]

>>17510956
The reality of things refutes it. Anti-natalism is in of itself a dead-end philosophy that will always lose to those who breed and have kids

[Anonymous No.17517499]

>tfw 100% agree with the book but not an anti natalist
Anti natalism isn't saving your would be kids from suffering. If there karma isn't worked out they will be reborn to who is irrelevant
in fact it is motivation to have kids and teach them the dharma

[Anonymous No.17517521]

/lit/ on pic, but just change the last for;

"mentally ill dude writing a book about how life is shity"

[Anonymous No.17517539]

>life is BEAUTIFUL my dudez!! it makes suffering worth it LOL!1111

[Anonymous No.17517547]

>>17517539
>everyone who isnt a sensitive crybaby has to be a naive optimist
both get the bullet

[Anonymous No.17517601]

>>17513921
A new Supreme Gentleman

[Anonymous No.17517645]

>>17517539
>>17517547
I cannot even conceive of the kind of life that someone would have to have for them to go on 4chan and say "life is AMAZING" as several anons have in this thread. It's not even "waah my life sucks," I have a relatively good life by human standards, but I cannot think of anything that could be changed about my current life that would make me say "life is amazing." I feel like it's just people trolling.

[Anonymous No.17517686]

>>17517330
Holy shit, that actually quiet good, once it proves that antinatalist are truly the one's with a good point.

[Anonymous No.17517717]

>>17517378
>>17517686
it's funny because I posted it to make fun of the autism of anti-natalists. Not to support it.

[Anonymous No.17517718]

>>17517645
God damn you fucking midwit: THE PROBLEM IS NOT THAT ANTINATALIST ARE "WAHHH LIFE SUCKS" THE POINTS IS, IS HUGE HUGE GAMBLE TO MAKE, A GAMBLE WITH SOMEONE ELSES LIVES, SO, IF THING GO WRONG YOUR FUCKING SONS WILL PAY THE PRICE AND WIN A SHITTY LIFE, G-A-M-B-L-E, STOP BEING A STUPID GORILLA A THINK LIKE A RATIONAL HUMAN BEING FOR ONCE IN YOUR LIFE INSTEAD OF BEING GUIDE BY EMOTIONS LIKE A FUCKING MONKEY.

[Anonymous No.17517726]

>>17517717
jokes on you bro, in actually give a good ammunition for antinatlism, and very good and on point, if cant see that, than a feel bad for your, mid wit.

[Anonymous No.17517738]

>>17517726
if you think that's good ammunition you're an even bigger autist. The spreadsheet is a joke, to laugh at. The wall of text from the poster is the proof that anti-natalism is a meme for autists. It's literally destroyed that guys family but he's too busy being right to care.

[Anonymous No.17517763]

>>17511089
>>17511073
people who say suffering is good are the ones who aren't facing thier issues or improving. people who say suffering is bad are the ones who improve themselves and the world around them to improve it.

[Anonymous No.17517817]

>>17517763
No. People who say suffering is good are the people who face their issues so many times that they recognize that it's the only way to grow as a person. People who say suffering is bad are people stuck in the brainlet state wallowing in self pity.

[Anonymous No.17517826]

>>17517738
Midwit.

[Anonymous No.17517834]

>>17513337
It's funny because most anti-natalists hate their family, blaming them for their own suffering. And yet in the end they return to them for an easy way out of their inevitable clusterfuck of a """philosophy"""

[Anonymous No.17517843]

>>17517826
>midwit

[Anonymous No.17517845]

>>17517834

Kind of like how men of the world always appeal to (others') Reason after a lifetime of affirming the world and the body whenever they happen to make them suffer.

[Anonymous No.17517848]

>>17517738
>think rationally the pro and cons of put another human on this planet
>weight the good and bad of variety of situation
>it's actually very bad overall
>say is no good to put a child on this world
>/lit/ midwit poster: "Nooooooooooooooooooooo you are a autist! Stop that bro! you a bigger autist!!!"

Fucking hell is like to discuss with a fucking moron, once I thought that /lit/ was full of brightest motherfucker on 4chink, besides some few here and there, overall /lit/ its actually full of dumb people, a shame.

[Anonymous No.17517873]

>>17510956
Goethe did

[Anonymous No.17517878]

>>17517848
>once I thought that /lit/ was full of brightest motherfucker on 4chink
you're literally 12. Just stop. You think being born with hair is equivalent to being born with a cord wrapped around the neck. Also importantly missing is the probability of all these events. Which are negligible in the case of the negative.

[Anonymous No.17517924]

>>17517878
ANALOGY

[Anonymous No.17518004]

>>17517848
>it's actually very bad overall
This conclusion is wrong 98% of the time and, with prenatal scanning and gene therapy, will be more like 100% soon enough.
Literally all you have against genuine bodily disability or one in a million random shit luck is
>but I'm depressed sometimes :'(
Only time I vaguely agree is when I see those fucking retards who insist on giving birth to a baby they know is going to be horribly deformed because "he's a miracle!"

[Anonymous No.17518025]

>>17517718
I'm an antinatalist, learn to read you dumb sperg

[Anonymous No.17518036]

>>17510956
He is bringing rationality into a space where it doesn't belong (unless you have actual autism). The Will precedes the Intellect. Most people have an irrational intuition that life is worth living despite the suffering.

[Anonymous No.17518056]

>>17517139
that
I'm ok with them removing themselves from the gene pool desu

[Anonymous No.17518247]

>>17518036
midwit

[Anonymous No.17518360]

bump

[Anonymous No.17518373]

>>17518360
Thread is at its bump limit, friendo.

[Anonymous No.17518464]

>>17517718
>ARE THESE DICE? AAAAA IM GOING INSANE EVERYTHING IS PURE GAMBLE EINSTEINMAN HELP ME