/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.19229434]

>exists
How will Natalists ever recover?

[Anonymous No.19229443]

By having children

[Anonymous No.19229454]

>>19229434
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.19229456]

[Anonymous No.19229462]

>>19229434
Natalism isn't a real thing; it's a boogieman invented by antinatalists who think that anyone who doesn't consider it immoral to have children must spend their lives shitting out people indiscriminately.

[Anonymous No.19229463]

>>19229456
>said the /lit/ poster.

[Anonymous No.19229468]

>>19229454

So, Brave New World it is, then?

[Anonymous No.19229525]

>>19229434
>has children anyway
How will antinatalists ever recover?

[Anonymous No.19229563]

>>19229525
Eventually, the natalist will give birth to an antinatalist, therein lies the last laugh.

[Anonymous No.19229591]

>>19229525
>Knowing something is wrong means you can't do it
lol

[Anonymous No.19229598]

Lol, what is there to argue about? People have children because they are horny. You don't want to fuck hot women? Fine, fuck off.

[Anonymous No.19229606]

>>19229598
>FIltered by the Is-Ought problem
lmaoing @ your life

[Anonymous No.19229663]

>>19229563
You will be proud of this happening? I thought you wouldn't want any more humans to be born...

[Anonymous No.19229710]

>>19229525
>Do as I say not as I do

[Anonymous No.19230038]

>>19229663
It is comparably better to the birth-death cycle continuing forever, yes.

[Anonymous No.19230157]

>>19229434
>disagrees
How will they ever recover bros?

[Anonymous No.19230220]

>>19229563
>have 2 children
>only one is an anti-natalist (and therefore a failure)
>the other gives birth to a healthy line
oh no no no

[Anonymous No.19230261]

>>19229434
David benatar himself got refuted by Julio Cabrera who is also an antinatalist and a much better and more thorough one.
https://redbioetica.com.ar/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Cabrera.pdf

[Anonymous No.19230293]

>>19229434
Life is good
I am committing an evil act by not bringing people into the world

[Anonymous No.19230309]

>>19229443
fpbp

[Anonymous No.19230775]

>waaaaaaah life contains more ouchies than cummies, i wish i'd never been born!!1!!1!
not much to recover from desu

[Anonymous No.19230831]

>>19230775
>waaaaaaah life contains more ouchies than cummies, i wish i'd never been born!!1!!1!
how to geniuenly recover from this bros??

[Anonymous No.19230920]

>>19230831
By realizing that neither pleasure nor pain have any lasting significance. All that matters is that which has spiritual significance.

[Anonymous No.19231288]

>>19230775

This is the lifesucker, no the antinatalist, argument. The whole genre of tragedy is nothing but lifesuckers crying because they have to swallow.

[Anonymous No.19232245]

>>19229434
By telling you to kill yourself as you should have already. Ungrateful little shits.

[Anonymous No.19232261]

>>19229456
You wanted to make a point and thought THAT would make sense? I guess.

[Anonymous No.19232267]

>>19229434
>be born in the best time to be a coddled manchild virtually drowning in indulgence
>still not enough for him, throws an existential temper tantrum
>is so defeated by the challenges of life that he claims to want to kill himself, still far too cowardly to actually do it
>"How will natalists ever recover?"
It's like they have to verbally commit suicide as real suicide gives too many boo-boos

[Anonymous No.19233416]

>So you dont plan on having children?
>WelL WhY DoNT YoU JuST KiLL YoURself

Breeders are, as always, complete retards

[Anonymous No.19233473]

>>19230261
This isn't a refutation. It's more of a critique of the more formal logic within the book. He is just suggesting focusing on the material arguments more and being more succinct.

[Anonymous No.19233488]

>>19229434
anti-natalists should kill themselves if they truly believe what they say, its called praxis

[Anonymous No.19233504]

I used to be AN but now I look at pregnancy threads on /s/ and think how awesome it would be to get a chick pregnant. I want to be a dad.

[Anonymous No.19233510]

>>19229434
Just eat some good food ffs, stop being too arrogant to appreciate the small things.

[Anonymous No.19233531]

>>19233488
Brainlet

[Anonymous No.19233543]

>>19233416
Most internet anti-natalists are retarded though and argue that life itself is an inherent negative, but then give poor reasoning to why they still continue living.
Not to say there's no valid points to anti-natalism, but like with most philosophies the online discussion of it is filled with retards and/or teenagers.

[Anonymous No.19233581]

>>19229434
Benatar is a retard, even Sam Harris humiliated him. His whole argument for antinatalism is super unconvincing.

[Anonymous No.19233951]

>>19233543
The argument to continue living is simple. It would bring undue suffering on others who care about you if you died. That's not fair.

[Anonymous No.19234100]

>>19229456
>The meaning of life can be boiled down to simple hedonistic animal drives to reproduce. If you're anti natalist its because you failed to win the big ape prize in the big ape competition.

Wow, anti-natalists btfo! How will they ever recover from this one.

[Anonymous No.19234172]

>>19233416
Being child-free is NOT the same thing as being an antinatalist, you disingenuous faggot. No one cares if you spread your worthless genes. We reject the notion that it is immoral to spread our own.

[Anonymous No.19234278]

>>19233951
>It would bring undue suffering on others who care about you if you died
How one can find that those around them are worth living for, yet not believe that they're worth living for their own sake, is something I'm glad to never understand

[Anonymous No.19234883]

>>19229456
Used up whores are more life-affirming

[Anonymous No.19234894]

Life: meaningless? yes definitely
Life: painful? yes to some degree
Pain: Bad enough to justify non-existence? No
Having Children: net negative? Not for all of us

Did Benatar really prove that pain justifies non-existence? I just fucked my wife and now we're cuddling watching TV. I know this is meaningless in the end, but I love her and the little moments are worth it

[Anonymous No.19234901]

its funny how antinatalists only start appearing in large numbers when a civilisation reaches a certain point whereby it begins to decay

what a strange coincidence

[Anonymous No.19234912]

>>19229434
Hmmm, seems like this person is influenced by someone who really does not want more humans to be born because he hates them, I wonder who it might be...

[Anonymous No.19234914]

>>19229434
lotta words to say that you're ugly and a virgin

[Anonymous No.19234917]

>>19234901
>There is considerable evidence to show that Roman society in the late Republic and early Empire was afflicted by a low birth- rate. Augustus in 18 B.C. found it necessary to pass the lex Iulia de maritandis ordinibus in the hope of raising the birth-rate by penalizing the unmarried and the childless. In 9 A.D. he attempted to supplement this law with the lex Papia Poppaea. The very existence of this legislation indicates that the problem of childlessness was widespread and long-lasting, a view which is further to this subject in Latin literature1). supported by references A number of theories have been put forward by scholars to explain this fact. Among these are the notion that Romans practised contraception and abortion to avoid the birth of unwanted from a form that members of the upper classes suffered children2), of dysgenic lead poisoning caused mainly by the use of lead cooking vessels, which rendered many of them sterile3), and that a form of natural selection in favour of infertility took place, due to the common practice among noble males of trying to marry heiresses who were the sole children of their families and therefore in their turn4). Any or all of likely to demonstrate low fertility these practices may have been genuine contributing factors to the low birth-rate in Rome. However it is the contention of this paper that a far more significant factor to the low birth-rate contributing was the Roman practice of taking very hot daily baths. ... There can be little doubt that the baths enjoyed by the Romans were very hot and very frequent. According to Pliny the Elder (PL N.H. 36.121) the census of baths taken by Aerippa in 33 B.C. snowed that there were 170 baths in Rome and this number undoubtedly increased with time. It is common knowledge that Romans, even of the lower social classes, were in the habit of taking daily baths and some seem to have bathed even more frequently (Petronius, Satyricon 72). The usual routine11) to warm up er was to play a game of ball in the sphaeristerium before entering the tepidarium where he would sweat for a while with his clothes on. He would then undress in the apodyterium and be anointed with oil. After this he would sweat profusely in the caldarium and even more profusely in the laconicum, which was directly over the hypocaust. The next step would be to have warm, tepid and finally cold water poured over him, after which he would be scraped with a strigil and sponge

https://kirkegaard.substack.com/p/ancient-history-dysgenics-genomics-and-cyclical-history-theory

[Anonymous No.19234928]

>>19234894
>Life: meaningless? yes definitely

[Anonymous No.19234940]

>>19234928
To be fair though, when the bugmen say that life has no meaning [without Christ] they are being correct.

[Anonymous No.19234960]

>>19234940
>To be fair though, when the bugmen say that life has no meaning [without Christ] they are being correct.

[Anonymous No.19234985]

>>19229443
Based, fpbp

[Anonymous No.19235014]

>>19234940
Christcuck moment.

[Anonymous No.19235168]

>>19234960
they seriously couldn't find a 3rd person who actually looks kinda like the meme to use? this is just disappointing

[Anonymous No.19235312]

>>19229434
Why is this guy allowed to run around saying this shit without getting locked up, but if I tried advocating suicide or convincing others to kill themselves they'd throw me in jail or the looney bin? I fail to see how they're any different.
In fact, why don't anti-natalists all kill themselves? Doesn't the fact that they don't prove that they're pathetic larpers?

[Anonymous No.19235875]

>>19234960
>>19235168
Yeah seriously, you could have just used John Oliver for the third guy and it would have had a couple of bonus points for being ironic and self-critical, but bugmen are too obsessed with the agenda to be funny

[Anonymous No.19235897]

>>19235312
Their argument is that the suicide of someone who already exists will cause more net pain, but I am very skeptical of this. ANs are very good at rationalization, so I am sure that if they wanted to they could easily come up with an argument that even though suicide would cause pain to family members, it would also have an affect on society by revealing that life is horrible and because of that people will be 0.00001% less likely to have children, so their death will reduce net suffering by cutting off at least one bloodline.

The reason they don't off themselves is either that they do not buy their own materialism and deep down, they are afraid for the fate of their souls, or otherwise they aren't actually that unhappy with their lives and the antinatalism is just an exercise in fart sniffing

[Anonymous No.19236182]

>>19234278
I just really really don't like suffering. And the rest of it is just OK at best. I'm not even depressed or anything.

[Anonymous No.19236195]

>>19235312
>if I tried advocating suicide or convincing others to kill themselves they'd throw me in jail or the looney bin
Nice headcanon.

[Anonymous No.19236330]

>>19229456
but children destroy woman's body
i want to affirm life by fucking said milky-white virgin, not bond with someone who already shitted three kids and looks like used-up wreck with saggy bosom

[Anonymous No.19236346]

>>19229456
Not everyone can fuck endless 10/10 virgin cunny proving that life is a fundamentaly negative experience.

[Anonymous No.19236354]

>>19234917
Nigger don't get paragraphs.

[Anonymous No.19236372]

>>19229434
Having children or not having children it doesn't matter, because in the end neither suffering or happiness are real, these two life concepts (and even the concepts of life and death) are built up in a naive ontology of the concept of "person" wich is a metaphysical concept. What i am trying to say: We don't exist at all to suffer!

[Anonymous No.19236427]

Antinatalism is the nature conclusion of materialism.

Which of course is true

[Anonymous No.19236558]

>>19233951
>The argument to continue living is simple. It would bring undue suffering on others who care about you if you died. That's not fair.
lmao in the first place no one cares about antinatalists, so that wouldn't bring unnecessary suffering upon anyone

[Anonymous No.19236574]

>>19236558
Spare a thought for the pessimist, he spoils his own existence

[Anonymous No.19236615]

>>19236574
What does this mean?

[Anonymous No.19236637]

>>19236615
I feel sorry for antinatalist. I imagine they have suffered a great deal and would be their friend.

[Anonymous No.19236743]

>>19233504
I have a pregnancy fetish, so I’m very much pro-natalism.

If the offspring doesn’t like living, they can always kill themselves, since I’m also pro-euthanasia.

[Anonymous No.19237239]

>>19236346
No, it just means that life has winners and losers. My ancestors have been winners all the way through prehistory, and so am I. What about you?

[Anonymous No.19237245]

You see, that’s the thing: anti-natalists are covert natalists who willingly subsume the responsibility to instigate natalists into behavior which is actually natalistic because only an anti-natalist truly cares.

[Anonymous No.19237388]

>>19229434
>How will Natalists ever recover?
recovey potion (25HP over 15 seconds)