/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.23336126]

So what, we should all commit suicide then?

[Anonymous No.23336135]

>>23336126
anti-existence fags when you put a gun to their head
>NOOOOOOO DON’T KILL ME PLEASE DON’T SEND ME TO ETERNAL NOTHINGNESS NOOOOOOO

[Anonymous No.23336199]

Do not forget he is South African . Do not forget he is Jewish . Do not forget he is small .

[Anonymous No.23336219]

>>23336199
I think he's tall. His brother is some kind of gene professor or something and he's a big Chad looking guy. I don't think there's actually any photos of him online

[Anonymous No.23336224]

It's somewhat difficult to find philosophers who argue in favor of suicide.

[Anonymous No.23336225]

I guess it's better
to have loved than to lost
And never stumbled across
The gift of knowing you
Whatever the fucking cost.

>This quote refutes antinatalism - life's worth is in its meaning and not a utilitarian calculus of pain/pleasure.

[Anonymous No.23336232]

>>23336224
You read about Jiwoon hwang? Horrible story. Guy writes a promortalist essay and dies for his beliefs (based). But actually fucks up his suicide attempt and spends weeks on life support brain dead until they switch the machine off.

[Anonymous No.23336239]

>>23336232
Hadn't heard of him, thanks.
A big reason why I'd be scared to ever do it. Too much risk of survival.

[Anonymous No.23336249]

Most people, when asked, would say they prefer to continue to exist, even with painless instant death options available. To them at least, the suffering is worth it.

[Anonymous No.23336262]

>>23336249
But there's a difference between continuing to live and starting a life for another person.

[Anonymous No.23336361]

>>23336262
Well yes, but lots of things we do carry risk of harm to others, like driving a car for example. We only avoid risk when it gets too high, eg if you don't have time to parent, you shouldn't have a child.

[Anonymous No.23336388]

Anti antinatalist have to be all trolls, I refuse to believe they are this dense.

[Anonymous No.23336392]

>>23336361
Where'd you get this driving a car example? I wrote a long ass post on reddit recently with the same example. Don't copy me.

[Anonymous No.23336502]

>>23336392
NTA and can't tell if you're being sarcastic (Reddit) but you're a retard if you think you made up the example of social acceptance of risk/driving.

[Anonymous No.23336667]

>>23336126
Just stop having kids, bro.

[Anonymous No.23336678]

>>23336126
Really, if existence is that bad, suicide isn't the answer. Mass murder and then suicide is. After all, you'd be doing them a favor.

[Anonymous No.23336745]

>>23336262
People are literally genetically programmed not to get this nuance. It's the hard limit to their rationality, hence people equating it with violence against children or suicide. It's only those things on a subliminal level.

[Anonymous No.23336890]

>>23336126
Honestly, I don't think antinatalism is anywhere near a universal truth, which I think is clearly demonstrated by how many people genuinely enjoy their lives. I just know that it's true for me, that I've been unhappy while alive and I would much prefer to not exist. it's probably because I'm a reclusive autist without a future.
>inb4 kill yourself then
Already tried plenty of times, but I've been stopped every time. If I had a means with assured success, I would in a heartbeat. I'm a depressed faggot, but at least I'm consistent, unlike these "ooooh I'm an antinatalist and existence isn't worth it but I'm not gonna die because reasons" posers.

[Anonymous No.23336927]

>>23336126
>>23336224
>>23336232
Pic related was an antinatalist that committed suicide

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqeN2RRR3xQ
https://vitrifyher.wordpress.com/2019/12/19/antinatalism-in-purgatory/

>I’m an antinatalist. I think it’s unforgivable to bring new people into this world given that there is suffering. The thing is that lately I’ve been thinking and feeling that people aren’t real. This would partially solve the problem of evil. There is just my suffering and everyone else is a simulation designed to spite me. This should cause me to not feel so antinatalist since the breeders are disgusting alien mockeries of a true human being, namely myself. Yet somehow I still feel very antinatalist. When I see children with their parents I am disgusted at the entire concept. They are probably just facets of the simulation and not souls brimming with the inner light of awareness like myself. And yet they still move me enough to cause disgust. I suppose that was the intention of the designer(s), to create something that appeared so real that it was actually disturbing. Dr. Miller says I have some sort of syndrome after finding out about my solipsism. I think he’s an imbecile who deserves to be burned on a stake. But out of my bodhisattva-like compassion I would instead grant him a consciousness and send him to heaven forever.

[Anonymous No.23336930]

>>23336126
Benatar was deboonked by David Pearce

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.23336934]

>>23336135
>eternal nothingness
Eternal nothingness is bullshit. There are a lot of plausible mechanisms for how an afterlife could potentially exist.

https://alwaysasking.com/is-there-life-after-death/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w13yLq16QiM

[Anonymous No.23336943]

>>23336930
Wow that's even worse. Obvious to anyone with a pulse that it's a selection event though.

[Anonymous No.23336944]

>>23336232
Brandt Gill is another one

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnKcFqyaOcY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZR3n4_lecM

[Anonymous No.23336953]

>>23336944
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZqvmJti9C8

[Anonymous No.23336955]

>>23336126
Rule number 1: Don't take advice from suicides.

[Anonymous No.23336959]

>>23336943
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J789iCFHaMo

[Anonymous No.23336986]

Because pain is a more direct and simple motivating principle than pleasure, we should expect net suffering to predominate within the domain of life, with this suffering increasing for every moment life continues to exist. Even if we were able to eliminate all life on earth this moment, the past net suffering would still have occurred, and there is likely life with the same negative utilitarian calculus countless other places in the universe. The only way to take this preponderance of suffering and make it so that it has been worthwhile is to use our opportunity of conscious and intelligent existence and take the dumb matter of the universe and construct as many new minds designed specifically to feel constant pleasure as possible out of it. Given how much more non-conscious matter there is in the universe than the relatively tiny amount currently engaged in conscious awareness, this would be able to swamp and overcome the net suffering of life and turn the universe from a place of net suffering into a place of net pleasure. So, it should be the moral imperative of all who love pleasure and loathe suffering to direct the technological progress of civilization towards the end of constructing as many minds experiencing constant pleasure as possible out of the matter of the universe. Unlike human minds, these artificial minds could be constructed specifically so they never tire or bore of pleasure, and every moment until the heat death of the universe is as joyous as the first. This may seem like a simple idea, but its importance cannot be overstated, as this program of converting the universe into minds experiencing pleasure is the only way to undo and reverse the natural tendency of the universe towards being a place of net suffering, and instead turn it into a realm of joy and contentment. The technological and philosophical abilities of humankind and any superintelligences we create should be directed towards this end of figuring out how to construct and propagate such minds, as no cause that we could engage in is more worthy.

[Anonymous No.23336993]

>>23336959
Yeah, love Dutton. I just see AN as the final boss of Anglo Utilitarian ideology, even if I sympathize with it. Just another bottleneck.

[Anonymous No.23337001]

>>23336126
Kys you demoralising fed.

[Anonymous No.23337002]

>>23336934
True, but antinatalists are typically also atheists

[Anonymous No.23337017]

>>23336993
As an addendum I think AN people have a more correct value system than your average Childfree hedonistic retard, it's just not as correct as religiosity as a resolution to suffering. I watched some interview with this technocrat investment-bro faggot who said his son said "The Childfree people are alright it's the Antinatalists who are crazy," when it's the exact opposite. AN people at least show concern for the unborn even if their prescription is insufficient.

[Anonymous No.23337020]

>>23336934
This is incredibly stupid and i can't believe someone took the time of his day to make such an atrocious, fallacious image. Much better to explain through the lens of religion if you're resorting to nonsensical bullshit as this

[Anonymous No.23337104]

>>23336934
This could be refuted if you assume panpsychism, where what precedes and succedes our more complex and organized consciousness is not nothingness, but merely a less organized state of material consciousness that we arose from and return to. So death doesn't represent an end to consciousness, but rather a return to a much lower level of consciousness than that capable of self-awareness.

[Anonymous No.23337112]

These guys committing suicide need to stop taking life so seriously man. It's sad. I mean what does it even matter - we are all dead in 80 years. What's the need to make these grand (violent) rebellions against your existence? What you want is gonna happen anyway, but thisnway you made mom sad ;_;

Live on bros, even if life isn't worth living. Stop taking it all so seriously.

[Anonymous No.23337312]

>>23336986
What a bizzare post. "Net suffering" is an abstraction. It matters to nobody (except cringey utilitarians). Suggesting we create countless beings (capable of experiencing great suffering) in service of the God of net pleasure is retarded. "Net" suffering doesn't even exist. Suffering is personal, individualized.

[Anonymous No.23337327]

>>23336953
>>23336944
I never heard of this guy and he seems to have no videos.

[Anonymous No.23337370]

>>23337312
That's like saying economic forces don't exist, only individual transactions and agreements.
But why stop there? People are just an abstraction, in reality they're just cells working together, which is also just an abstraction. Only interacting quantum fields exist.

[Anonymous No.23337391]

>>23337370
Your post is like saying we should sacrifice worker rights for "the economy"

[Anonymous No.23337402]

>>23336126
>author still here
well clearly life is worth living

[Anonymous No.23337461]

>>23336135
the philosophy is still correct even if as meat robots we are programmed to resist it

[Anonymous No.23337465]

>>23336232
man he was cute tho

[Anonymous No.23337553]

>>23336232
How do you even fuck up a suicide attempt? Just put your car in the garage, close the door, turn the car on, and drift off into a painless death as the carbon monoxide kills you. I don't understand people who try some other method of suicide that has a risk of failing when doing it painlessly and in a foolproof way is so easy.

[Anonymous No.23337560]

>>23337370
They don't. Money is just a legal fiction agreed on by society. It's as real as godzilla and faithful women.

[Anonymous No.23337587]

>>23337312
>"Net suffering" is an abstraction. It matters to nobody
I have a strong suspicion that consciousness is explained by there being a universal "overmind" that experiences all conscious states in the universe simultaneously, and by its experience of them provides them their reality. If this is the case, then the degree of net pleasure or suffering among all extant minds is the degree of pleasure or suffering within this universal mind, and therefore maximizing pleasure minus suffering maximizes the pleasantness of the conscious experience of this mind at any given moment. This is why maximizing total pleasure throughout the universe matters, and why increasing the number of created minds designed to experience pleasure becomes imperative.

[Anonymous No.23337798]

>>23337020
Brainlet

[Anonymous No.23337822]

>>23336126

[Anonymous No.23337844]

>>23336934
That sounds horrifying.

[Anonymous No.23337847]

>>23336930
More hedonism? More drugs?