What are some arguments against antinatalism?

I don't know, but your existence is an argument in its favor.

>>7491863
Great literature discussion

>>7491863
>supporting antinatalism

None that are worth repeating.

>>7491849
>>7491863
>>7491865
>>7491884
>>7491892
>replies: 4
>posters: 3
Sure smells like samefag in here.

>>7491896
Indeed it does, indeed it does

>>7491849
I would say that the same arguments you could apply against suicide could be expanded across the whole species. beyond that, earth without life is boring, we dont need another rock orbiting a star, and even if we fuck everything up, we are kind of in an experiential bubble- I dont believe in aliens. but if there is other sentience or if we arent the only species capable of large-scale infrastructure, then that means that we won't do anything by dying off --another species will rise up and fuck it all up. we just wouldn't be around to control/teach them.

>>7491901
There are no obvious robust arguments against suicide as a concept though. Of course we don't really do anything by continuing into perpetuity either. There is no teleological basis for humanity as a whole, let alone an individual so approaching the issue from this angle seems dubious to me at least.

literally white people bullshit

>>7491910
experience of joy is enough of a goal for me my friend. suffering is just something that you get joy from when you conquer. cant experience joy if you're dead

>>7491923
The subject is contextualised into a Lyotardist narrative that includes reality as a totality. Therefore, the primary theme of the works of Smith is not, in fact, theory, but neotheory.

>>7491849
"arguments" against anti natalism usually consist of name calling and memes, specifically calling anti natalist fedoras

>>7491927
Uh, what?

It's gay and stupid and it makes me mad.

>>7491932
If neostructuralist objectivism holds, we have to choose between capitalist narrative and subtextual dematerialism. In a sense, Foucault promotes the use of precapitalist discourse to attack class divisions.

>>7491941
Debord suggests the use of precapitalist discourse to read and modify society. It could be said that the example of capitalist postcultural theory prevalent in Smith’s Mallrats is also evident in Chasing Amy.

>>7491930
Yeah, this is the problem for me. I will clarify I am not an antinatalist. I just don't feel it and I am a father besides that. But ultimately I see a sort of logical consistency and coherence from antinatalists that I have yet to see challenged convincingly. For now I chock it up to the rather inconsequential position that antinatalism is filling in public discourse, and therefore lack of perceived need from intelligent natalists (who I imagine just take natalism for granted and rightly so) to argue their position.

>>7491927
antinatalism is already a metanarrative, and i dont give enough of a fuck to figure out which smith you mean. Ihope you dont, but im not gonna beg you not to kill yourself.

>>7491941
Is this Lacanian philosophy? I think that whole French thing set philosophy back centuries

File: 1415765145099.png (120KB, 914x960px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 914x960px

>>7491913
Racist pls go back to polmblr

Depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation, and indeed antinatalism and efilism are all completely reasonable reactions to the reality in which we live, and the "why" is rooted in thermodynamics. The second law of thermodynamics, aka entropy dictates that specifically ordered states do not last from moment to moment. Individually we are ordered states of course but all of humanity is an ordered state as well. If you want to experience entropy firsthand just lie down in your bed until you develop bedsores and you start to merge with synthetic material. Or better yet, lie in a more idiomatic sort of bed because in order to stick around for long one must stay on the move in life or else you get bored and society waves the hammer menacingly. You need to have experiences and keep yourself "stimulated" to avoid mental decay and when there is an absence of these things the mind becomes redundant and self-referential. It runs out of material to confuse itself with and the true realities of depression and anxiety set in. These are "sicknesses" sure enough (depression can genetically age you up to 6 years) but to think of self-destructive emotional states as irrational, that is to say subjective, is dead wrong. Indeed boredom is probably the most authentic emotion we have as it is equal parts the anxiety that something will go wrong and the depression that things are not going as right as they ought to be. Ultimately it is a default state which arises interstitially at first and becomes chronic once the conditions of our quotidian existence have become so predictable that we cannot view ourselves in terms of our own adaptability anymore. And of course even if we do our best to stay as active, both physically and socially, we are given to aging; we begin to lose our structural integrity, as if we are dissolving into some universal soup. The whole concept of human existence is a contingency of no essentiality. We don't truly know what it is in the minds of other creatures but do they see "rocks" and "trees" or is what they see more in register with that senseless cosmic soup? What we know for certain is that in the human experience the whole observable world is characterized by compartmentalization, organization and definition and how horrible would it be if all of that was just a pervasive delusion we foisted upon ourselves simply because we're this particularly stubborn spot the universe, while it has done tremendous damage, has yet to render indistinguishable. Perhaps the terrible thing about being human is how incongruous you are with everything else.

File: 1441808251040.jpg (9KB, 209x300px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 209x300px

"flowers smell nice"

File: saturn.jpg (76KB, 700x1287px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 700x1287px

My main objection to antinatalism in its prevalent form is that it is a form of liberalism, which makes it self-defeating.

By that I mean that antinatalists are generally people who are childless, want to remain childless for antinatalist reasons and want to convince others to do the same. They claim to consider reproduction to be the worst thing you can do, but they aren't consistent in it, they don't really mean this. They are liberals. This is demonstrated by the fact that they consider reproduction not worse than intervening with someone else's right to reproduce. If they were true antinatalists, they would intervene. They would consider violence a justified method of combating existence.

A real antinatalist would not only intervene in other people's reproductive behaviour, he would oppose, by all means necessary, the continuation of life in general.

A real antinatalist would be someone who considers every act that diminishes life to be the morally right thing to do, and every act that aids the continuation of life to be morally wrong.

A real antinatalist would consider planting a tree to be infinitely worse than stabbing a pregnant woman in the belly.

A real antinatalist be an extinction event accelerationist.

A real antinatalist would rather be called an omnicidist, meaning a person who actively strives to destroy all life, to end the existence and continuation of every single lifeform.

>>7492161
How could they justify violence if the only objective value they had any sense of was human suffering? Furthermore how is criticism of a person or group's incapacity to practice what they preach anything but an ad hominem? Especially when it is put in such a spurious framework as this?

>>7492161
>a real antinatalist would be different from how antinatalists actually are

So I guess the best argument against it is that it doesn't exist. Slick.

>>7491849
"I want to have children".

>>7491901
How is "it would be boring" or "I feel joy because of X" an actual argument, though? That's a preference.

>>7492111
Wow its like reading a pessimistic but equally retarded Deepak Chopra

>Dude our consciousness is like a microcosm of the universe

>>7492171
>How could they justify violence if the only objective value they had any sense of was human suffering?
More than 80% of people reproduce. By murdering someone you are ending a cycle of suffering that would be a lot worse than just giving a few relatives and friends a short period of grief.

>Furthermore how is criticism of a person or group's incapacity to practice what they preach anything but an ad hominem? Especially when it is put in such a spurious framework as this?
It's not an incapacity but an unwillingness that is embedded in their very ideology, which reduces their position to empty posturing. A conventional antinatalist's position can be likened to someone who says "I'm morally opposed to the raping of children, but I am against preventing child rape by any other form than gently telling the child rapist that he should not do so." It's a position that shows the weakness of their dedication to their position and exposes their greater alliance to a position that is directly at odds with it.

>>7492176
>So I guess the best argument against it is that it doesn't exist. Slick.
My problem with antinatalism as a general movement is that it is not antinatalist enough and even barely antinatalist at all.

>>7492188
You should use Head & Shoulders because nigga you are flakey as fuck

>>7492188
>My problem with antinatalism as a general movement is that it is not antinatalist enough

I honestly doubt that that is your actual problem with it.

Consider eg "The Surge" during the Afghan conflict. One can easily have supported the surge, while having opposed the initial invasion (and maintaining that the invasion was a mistake). It's not hypocritical to do so, nor is it in any way selling short the principles under which one might have opposed the invasion.

Similarly, one can easily feel that it is better not to have been born, while also feeling that murder is wrong, without hypocrisy or any selling-short of the basis on which one feels that it would be better not to have been born.

>>7492187
You can criticize it and call it retarded all you want but thats just your ideological gag reflex kicking in

>>7492161
disgusting pasta, hello reddit

>>7492201
Why do you say so?

>>7492210
Antinatalism isn't just the sentiment that it would have been better not to have been born, it is an ideology that advocates (human) extinction on the basis that life brings more suffering than it is worth. To then consider that murder is worse than reproduction is a hypocritical clinging to conventional values.

>>7492235
>pointing out inconsistencies is reddit

>>7492161
A real faggot would be called No.7492161

>>7492258
>Antinatalism isn't just the sentiment that it would have been better not to have been born, it is an ideology that advocates (human) extinction on the basis that life brings more suffering than it is worth.

Yes, the one follows from the other quite naturally.

>To then consider that murder is worse than reproduction is a hypocritical

No, go back and re-read >>7492210. Keep re-reading it until you understand. "I don't agree with X" is not a case for "X is hypocritical".

>>7492259
Are you angry because your brand of antinatalism got exposed as inconsequential posturing or because you think I am in favour of antinatalism?

Antinatalism is a spook and it has been shown here time and time again, that Stirner cannot be argued against. You can't create abitrary categories of good and bad morality because objectively moral judgements do not in fact exist.

it's not a "movement" you fucking faggot, go parade in a thong you spooked ass nigger

>>7492265
I'm shitposting because I find your lack of distance disturbing. Also consider >>7492267

>>7492266
Anti-natalism and moral nihilism/error theory aren't mutually exclusive. You can advocate first order moral claims while thinking said claims are in an objective sense false.

>>7492262
"I am against X but I am against the active opposition of X" makes one's position empty posturing and merely lip service in effect.

Also, mainstream antinatalism is argued from a negative hedonist position and from a consistent negative hedonistic position murder causes less suffering than reproduction.

>>7492282
As soon as it becomes an abstract ideological position that influences thought, it becomes a spook.

>>7492273
Why do you think I lack distance?

I'm not arguing in favour of antinatalism, I'm just pointing out inconsistencies that I consider detrimental to its credibility in the form that its generally adhered to.

>>7492283
>"I am against X but I am against the active opposition of X" makes one's position empty posturing and merely lip service in effect.

OK? Assuming this to be an accurate account of anti-natalism (it 100% isn't, but who cares), that's still not 'hypocritical'.

>Also, mainstream antinatalism is argued from a negative hedonist position and from a consistent negative hedonistic position murder causes less suffering than reproduction.

You're begging the question of anti-natalism's inconsistency.

In effect, you are saying: If anti-natalists agreed with me about X, they would conclude Y. Therefore, anti-natalists are wrong to reject Y. That's asinine.

>>7492283
why should i serve you or anyone else, just kill yourself you lazy, stupid fuck

>>7492301
I'm not saying you should, but antinatalists say you should. I'm merely suggesting that people follow through effectively on their ideological stance because otherwise it is merely empty posturing.

>>7492304
they don't, you thick fuck

>>7492304
Jesus Christ, you're like that socratean undergrad from yesterday.

>>7492309

Don't be silly, he's talking about the Real Anti-Natalists that exist in his imagination. The fake (ie, real) anti-natalists are the ones who SHOULD be like the Real ones, but they aren't, because they're Fake.

Basically I think anti-natalism is the new solipsism, in that there's just going to be a steady stream of tards falling off the hay-wagon ready to explain to you how dumb it is to earnestly believe you're the only mind in existence. WHAT IF YOU MET ANOTHER SOLIPSIST EVER THINK OF THAT

>>7492293
Maybe hypocritical is technically the wrong phrase, but my point in my original post is that mainstream antinatalism is inconsequential because it considers people's right to not adhere to its principles to trump the right of potential beings not to come into existence. It's like saying you're anti-theft, but the right to steal is more important than the right to not be stolen from. Which is in a way a valid position, technically, but it reduces your anti-theft stance to an empty gesture.

>In effect, you are saying: If anti-natalists agreed with me about X, they would conclude Y. Therefore, anti-natalists are wrong to reject Y. That's asinine.
Most antinatalists I have encountered do argue from a sort of negative utilitarianism which would make it silly to suggest that a single death would outweigh the creation of of innumerable lives and deaths by allowing the cycle of reproduction to continue. As I said, I'm criticising the common form of antinatalism that I often encounter. If people are against reproduction for other reasons, those are simply not to be included in my criticism. I'm not begging the question, I'm identifying the specific ideology I have an issue with.

>>7492338

Pontificating about an empty gesture seems a bit empty-ish itself, but OK, whatevs.

>I'm not begging the question, I'm identifying the specific ideology I have an issue with.

The question-begging point was separate from the part you quoted. I see that may not have been clear. Any case, Some anti-natalists you've known have been inconsistent in their reasoning (you think). Remind me why we care?

>>7492352
I guess because we enjoy talking about about philosophy and ideology on the internet. At least I do, that's why I'm pointing out what I consider to be a flaw of antinatalism in practice as I often see it.

I generally take pleasure in telling people they're not adhering to their claimed positions as much as they could and thereby implying that they are not dedicated enough or do not actually believe what they think they believe fully and are living in bad faith, to be honest.

>>7492378
praise jesus, amirite

Only rich people should be allowed to have kids.
And kill everyone in third world countrys so these dumb niggas won't get any more childs and produce more suffering.

File: Sartre.jpg (64KB, 766x335px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 766x335px

>>7492378
>bad faith
Are you pic rel?

>>7492378
>I'm pointing out what I consider to be a flaw of antinatalism in practice as I often see it.

Well yes, but this is an amended position. You had to be talked down from "Anti-natalism is teh stoopidz y no genocide" to "Some anti-natalists are inconsistent in blah blah blah".

Given that - any bad faith skeletons lurking in your closet?

File: inhissteps.jpg (61KB, 365x596px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 365x596px

>>7492385
If you believe in Him, I would suggest to you to praise him fully in both word and deed, since you wouldn't want to live less in accordance to your values than you could.

>>7492378
that shitty pasta really gave you a hard on, didn't it?
you'd make a mighty fine fundamentalist recruit

File: soc.png (3MB, 1149x1457px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1149x1457px

>>7492411
>Well yes, but this is an amended position. You had to be talked down from "Anti-natalism is teh stoopidz y no genocide" to "Some anti-natalists are inconsistent in blah blah blah".
It's rather a more clearly explained position than an amended one, the structure of it remains the same. I don't think its merely some antinatalists though but most of them. I don't think I ever encountered any that did not argue from a negative utilitarian position. Which other kinds of antinatalism do you consider common?

>Given that - any bad faith skeletons lurking in your closet?
I'm cursed with a good nose for bad faith to the degree that I can't bring myself to consistently commit to any concrete ideology because the cognitive dissonance caused by knowing that I would never really be committed would be too much to bear to be honest. In practice this means that I stand for nothing, or for wildly different things for short bursts, always realising that there is no foundation to any position I take but that I at least realise this and am therefore at least consistent in my inconsistency.

>>7492441
I wrote that shitty pasta, mate.

I think if I ever would be able to commit to an ideology I would be an extreme fundamentalist, yes. The bad faith is very evident when people contrast 'moderate muslims' with 'fundamentalist muslims' and conflate the former with good muslims and the latter with bad muslims, for example. "Oh, he's a good guy, his actions don't match his ideas at all! Lovely ideas by the way, nothing wrong with them. as long as you don't take them serious of course!"

Most people dislike commitment so much that they practically consider completely inconsequential lip service to whatever you claim to believe in the highest virtue, but they will praise commitment and consistency with the same breath, which is bad faith of the highest order.

>>7492454
>>7492482
your nose is shit, faith and logic are not to be confused.
regarding muslims, it's about interpretation, not everyone is a fundamentalist like you

>>7491849
Bible

>>7492494
It's not merely interpretation itself but not acting or thinking in accordance with the interpretation one professes to adhere to.

>>7492161
wew lad, sounds like Notem Portant desu
is there any literature that features a character like this?

>>7492520
bait, fuck me

well meme'd, i need sleep and a fix, go fuck yourself

>>7492527
Why do you think so?

People believe they believe things which they don't really believe all time.

>>7492553
>People believe they believe things which they don't really believe all time.

How'd you mean? Not to be a dick, but please do describe the form of what you mean rather than providing an instance.

Response to antinatalists:

That the greater part of life for man is suffering rather than pleasure is a coincidence. A mere artefact of history. There are potential futures where individual life is so pleasurable that all the collective suffering of humanity could be seen as a worthy price of admission.

By continuing to reproduce you are purchasing a lottery ticket for your offspring. They might make it go the jackpot. Yeah, lotteries have awful odds, but it is possible in theory to win.

Really both natalist and antinatalist thought are reasonable positions. The difference is hope v despair. Optimism v pessimism. Are you a gambler, or would you like to cash out?

>>7492589
>natalism is being a complete fucking moron

>>7492601

But anon, if you're not in, you can't win! 100% of lottery winners played the lottery, just saying.

>>7492570
For example, I know a guy who is a fervent Catholic who believes mortal sinners will go to hell. Yet he lives in mortal sin consistently. He is risking going to hell for his actions constantly, yet he believes hell to be real and something to be very worried about. Yet he does not take it seriously on another level.

The same guy also believes touching hot stoves will burn you with the same seriousness and he never touches hot stoves as a consequence.

So he believes two things to be real, he believes himself to believe they are real (that is to say, he is sincere), but in practice he treats one as being nonsense and the other as being real.

>>7492607
100% of morons are morons, if not bait

>>7492610
>For example

Sigh. I DID ask, dude.

Anyhoo, I think you're conflating belief with acceptance, where 'belief' is a doxastic attitude (regarding a proposition as true) and 'acceptance' is a behaviour pattern (actions consistent with a belief).

It's a lot clearer to lay out what you're saying in that way, rather than to say people "don't really believe what they believe".

File: comfocalypse.jpg (125KB, 962x642px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 962x642px

Antinatalists have actually already won since on a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.

They are just impatient, but their impatience is impotent since they know very well they will neither convince nor force the entire world to stop reproducing.

They should just realise that their dream will come true and that the only thing they can do is wait for it, get comfy and enjoy the show.

>>7492612

Well there's a difference between 'bait' and a joke.

>>7492616
Sorry, I misread your post.

That is a more clear way to describe what I mean, and I confess that I deliberately phrased it in a contradictory sounding way to make the idea seem more provocative than it is because that is how Zizek gets attention and because it is fun.

>>7492620
Yes, jokes don't necessarily have targets

>>7492601
No, it is being realistic. Only a tiny fraction of all lives will be so immensely pleasurable. By nature, 99.9% of people will never be more than rubes, suckers, drowning in pain. Individually, statistically, antinatalism is intelligent. Most would do well to never have been born.

>>7492601
O wait u said natalist is for dumbos I misread my b dude, here we go

Human psych is funny. Our absolute position on hierarchies doesn't matter so much to us as our position relative to our neighbors. So even though human life is more painful than it is pleasurable, people are happy enough so long as they are doing better than the rest of the suckers they happen to be able to see with their eyes at the moment. Generally.

This is a hopeful sign, so is transhumanism, ai development, gene therapy and so on. Of course each of those can fail spectacularly in far more hellish ways than they can go right, but cest la vie

Really we are at an interesting place.

>>7492664
This, we are at a point in history where a lot of the things we for a long time saw as inevitable part of the human condition are about to become the subject of manipulation and change in great ways, whether positive or negative.

"Bury me on my face," said Diogenes; and when he was asked why, he replied, "Because in a little while everything will be turned upside down."

>>7492664
please elaborate on transhumanism, ai, gene therapy and so on.
phrase it like you would to a moron

>>7492675
or maybe you would be so kind to elaborate on these, in the near future, profound changes to consciousness (of which we know jack shit according to my pleb perspective), anon

>>7492684
I always find it hard to 'eloborate' without being asked specific questions to be honest.

But China is engineering human embryos as we speak, for example, which can lead to people creating smarter, happier, healthier, stronger, faster, better people. After 200,000 years of accepting random genetic lottery misfortunes we're about to be able to build Übermenschen.

>>7491849
Life is beautiful

>>7492526
the protagonist of my diary to be honest

>>7491849
Nietzsche exists

>>7491849
Most arguments against the problem of evil or the problem of pain double as arguments against antinatalism.

But nobody is ever going to have an argument about this because we all instinctively feel that to live is better than not to live.

>>7493257
>natalist parents consider themselves gods

seems legit

>>7492454
>Look at me guys!

>>7492684
He already did. He is talking about creating mass delusion and detachment from reality in order to end suffering. Like people are going to be born as aristocrats in a virtual world where all their interlocutors are NPCs living in squalor?

>>7493243
>create the idea of the Ubermensch
>refute the idea of free will

Topkek

>>7492187
>Dude
Opinion discarded.

>>7493434
But its a parody

Prepare to be BTFO

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nM0kxk_tHcA

>>7493459
OPINION. DISCARDED.

>>7492111
I dismissed and did not read your 111-get post simply because you can't use paragraphs.

>>7493507
So James Joyce does it and everyone applauds, I do it and get shit. Yeah, thats fair

>>7493522
Oh dearie me! You are no James Joyce, old chap old sock. I must admit your baseless ego has put me in the most excellent humor.

>>7493496
Oh god, make it stop

>>7493362
No, you're crazy. I didn't elaborate but I can. It really comes down to intelligence increase.

Artificial intelligence, gene theory whatever, the important bit is when we can consistently make something much smarter than a default human. After that the smarter ai or whatever should be able to develop something even more intelligent, and so on. It's the idea of the transhumanist singularity. Beyond the singularity we cannot imagine.

>>7493496
Embarrassing.

>>7493496
I can admit to being a cretinous pleb but what exactly is this guys point?

>>7493588
your arguement is evolution.
in that case, we'd need to 'evolve' beyond recognition, i don't consider this a good arguement

"hey guys, don't be realistic, we might be flying around space as omniscient genitalia in a very, very uncertain future. the odds that history has something to teach is high, but hey, let's keep this clusterfuck of pain and agony going why don't we?"

you place way to much power in stemfags

>>7492181
'boring' in that context means that there is no good to come of an extinction event. Nothing worth doing. It isnt a question of what gives joy, but of what position allows for the continued experience of joy. not existing is a state in which it isnt possible to feel joy. make your own conclusions, nigger. I shouldn't have to hold your hand.

>>7494902
to exterminate pain is good, even if that good is not enjoyed by anyone

>>7494858
Can you come up with a better response antinatalist thought? Or are you just gonna bitch like a bitch.

>>7494999
"what are some good arguements against antinatalism"

you're the one supposed to provide thought. antinatalism can be argued with perfect logic none the less, if thats what you need.

fucking autist, read a book

>>7495030
Lol I'm not supposed to do anything you pathetic slime, suck my cock

>>7494921
no, to conquer pain is good. feeling extreme agony is still slightly better than feeling nothing for many reasons. Hope is one, struggle is another, understanding pain so as to help others is a third. the list goes on and on.

File: congo.jpg (201KB, 1600x1144px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 1600x1144px

>>7495034
steppin' with your weapon on safety, squeez it bitch ass nigga

>>7495077
>feeling extreme agony is still slightly better than feeling nothing for many reasons
being in extreme debt is still sligthly better than being broke for many reasons

>hope
being a moron

>understanding pain
become antinatalist

>>7495077
understanding pain and helping others = antinatalism

>>7495077
t. someone who has never experienced extreme agony

>>7495825
haha I've been suicidal for a long time, man. you don't know fuck all about me or my life. you rat cunt bitch.

>>7495730
helping others by making sure they don't exist? what kinda retard are you?

>>7495102
so your argument is:

>an unrelated red herring

>name calling

>begging someone to change their mind without telling them why

come back when you've got an argument.

>>7495863
>muh experience bro
you're an ignorant, shelterd suburban pussy virgin faggot nigger who ain't sold a nickel rock
>>7495866
yes, you're retarded
arguement please
>>7495874
>not unrelated
>not red herring
>you should be called names and tortured to death
>not begging, stating which philosophical conviction the comprehension of pain will lead to

again, i'm not the one supposed to provide thought but here you go

arguement 1:
i have a pebble in my shoe

arguement 2:
the presence of pain is bad
the presence of pleasure is good
the absence of pain is good, even if that good is not enjoyed by anyone
the absence of pleasure is not bad unless there is somebody for whom this absence is a deprivation

come back when you've got an arguement, pleb

>>7495959
>today I had a pebble in my shoe so I decided the whole human race should be exterminated.

> It wouldn't suck if pleasure stopped existing, guys I promise.

not even worth a conversation.

I don't want to contribute to the incredible surge in overpopulation that will inevitably create a miserable world for my hypothetical kids, personally.

>>7495986
yeah, "pebble", there are quite a few of those

you can't argue with perfect logic but for christs sake kill yourself m8

>>7495991
we totally need population control. antinatalism is too extreme, though. Its the difference between keeping a gun for self defense and going on a shooting rampage.

>>7496014
you go ahead, you're the antinatalist here.

>>7496027
antinatalism doesn't advocate suicide per se, you should educate yourself on the matter

thought you weren't having this conversation m8

>>7496039
lol you're right m8, I'll fuck off and let you circlejerk in peace.

File: 1401985495037.gif (2MB, 275x248px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 275x248px

>>7496056
yeah, fuck off pleb

>>7496084
Honestly the best argument against antinatalists is to make fun of them for being 2edgy4 u, but here I don't even have to. This nigger is a self parody

>>7496019
true. i agree.

>>7495863
You should go talk to a torture victim and tell them your theory about how extreme agony is better than feeling nothing. Tell them to conquer that pain just like you conquered your existential crisis.

>>7491849
You don't need any. Just reject the silly assumptions upon which their whole argument is based.

File: burn world burn.jpg (33KB, 249x273px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 249x273px

>>7495991
I'm don't want kids because the West is crumbling to be honest and I don't want my children to be second rate citizens in a country full of violent savages. There's no way I can justify putting someone through the next 100 years of human history.

Après nous le déluge, lads.

Antinatalism makes untenable assertions and derives a metaphysical connection between pleasure and pain despite each being a material, evolutionary phenomenon.

>>7496777
How so?

Antinatalism seems to me:

-Suffering is bad
-Therefore don't cause suffering

Seems like a fairly straightforward negative hedonism.

>>7496791
Suffering and pleasure are posited as the opposite ends of a cosmic equation when no such connection could ever reasonably be made. They are separate biological adaptations that simply came about to maximize the potential of the species.

No descriptive meaning can be derived from any of it. The human system is self-justifying. Antinatalism isn't consistent with a descriptive ethical theory and thus is inconsistent with reason.

>>7496796
Another problem I have with antinatalism is that they ascribe a value judgment to non-existence. This simply makes no sense. If the universe existed without humans, it wouldn't be a state that could be assessed as "preferable" or "worse", it would be immune to assessment. To then found a philosophy on an unassessable theoretical and describe it as baseline or neutral doesn't seem consistent.

File: 1432793747368.jpg (55KB, 660x495px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 660x495px

>>7492161
A lot of antinatalists want to slowly reduce or eliminate the human population to save the rest of nature and heal the biosphere. Try again.

>>7492617
this

why argue with normies? their days are numbered

>>7496828
>ending human suffering so that tigers can suffer forever

Now that just seems animal cruelty.

In my view the idea that only pleasure or suffering matters to humans is incomplete. There is also a sense of evolving under which the acquisition of knowledge is included. And every experience is an acquisition of knowledge, so we can also say that the very act of experiencing sensory input has value in itself. There is a deep curiosity that drives us to not only learn more, but experience.
That knowledge has value is an idea accepted since ancient times of course, but all too often it is subordinated under the pain/pleasure axis, but I would argue that this is faulty.
The argument that we only want this because it brings us pleasure is not convincing because acquisition of knowledge simply doesn't bring pleasure. We don't feel happy about learning new things. In fact, solving a mystery only to find a mundane answer is deeply disappointing.

This drive to experience is where our will to live comes from. It's easy to put off the will to live as just some irrational instinct, but even instincts have an ultimate purpose. That is, most of the time, pleasure. But if pleasure is the foundation of the will to live, it would make no sense for this instinct to prevail in the face of great suffering.
If the will to live was based on wanting to experience pleasure, we would not have it if we lacked pleasure in life.

So the foundation of the will to live is not pleasure, but the desire to experience and evolve. Consider the idea of suicide, and you will immediately feel a deep desire to "keep experiencing". It's like you feel you'll miss out on something if you die. But if life is suffering, then what POSITIVE thing could you be missing out on? The only conclusion is that experiencing itself has higher value to us than pain or pleasure.

Therefore you cannot just claim "coming into existence is painful, and the fact that people are glad about existing makes no sense so they must be wrong anyway". There is obviously a reason for why people desire continued existence that can't be done away with "lol irrational instincts".

>>7496975
Well bringing new people into the world is entirely different than that. There is really no argument for it here. You made a specious argument why suicidal people should keep going but not one that explains why we should foist consciousness onto new people.

File: biology textbook.png (155KB, 216x357px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 216x357px

>>7491849

>>7497043
Well that is not a moral argument against antinatalism. If it is then rape would be justifiable for KVs

>>7497080
when I read
>>7491849
I don't see the word "moral".
Besides, antinatalist arguments are someof the worst examples of unsupported statements and begging the question in history, so if you want to point in that direction no anti-antinatalist arguments are required; they collapse under their own weight.

>>7497087
Whatever nerd

>>7497087
Not justifiable: Rape
Justifiable: Creating both the person who is raped and the rapist

Because it is God's Will that human civilization continues.

>>7497104
>IU don't have a reply: the post

File: disgust.png (155KB, 394x464px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 394x464px

>>7497131
Rape = the intentional infliction of trauma on another by a moral actor.
Childbirth = the creation of a new life with no intention of causing harm
They are nothing alike
>I suggest a 100 level Philosophy class

>>7497343
Humanity is a spook

>>7497420
Rape= sexual gratification with an attendant condition that it necessarily brigs harm to the person being raped

Childbirth= gratification of reproductive drives with the attendant condition that it necessarily brings harm to the person being born

>>7497572
>implying rape is about sex

>>7497014
>You made a specious argument why suicidal people should keep going

That's not what I argued at all. I said they keep going because they value experience over the negatives of life. If they didn't, they would actually kill themselves.

What people do is say "oh I really want to die, but this damn will to live is preventing me from going through with it", which is nonsense. You can't treat an instinct of yours as some seperate force that inacts on you because it IS you. When someone doesn't kill themselves, it's simply the result of experience being valued over suffering. If suffering is really so great that you want to exit life, then by all means do it, it's as simple as that.

The anti-natalism argument makes no sense because it supposes that people are doomed to an existence they don't want but "have to" experience regardless, which they can only achieve pretending the will to live isn't part of their self.

>>7492880

>After 200,000 years of accepting random genetic lottery misfortunes we're about to be able to build Übermenschen.

this is literally the ending to the elementary particles.

>>7497747
The Possibility of and Island, actually.

>>7497706
Just because people value the life they have doesn't mean overall people should value the lives they end up with. And the reason the argument is so specious is because the need to survive is no more essential than any addiction.

>>7497747
>>7497756
I've read neither, only Soumission so far.

Do you recommend them, lads?

I think the cause, or more-so, the reason for the great levels of human suffering in modern society is due to our biological evolution being drastically far behind the current state of technological and lifestyle conditions that we exist in. For example, our living conditions do not really call for any form of mandatory exercise or exposure to sunshine, which is of course antithetical to what our anachronistic biological development needs in order to function best. We simply do not need to run around looking for berries since computers do everything for us. Now, the major trend in opinion of today views staying healthy and working out as good, right, and motivated but I see it as simply yielding to the demands old machinery. TLDR the more technologically advanced our society becomes the more unhappy we will be due to our obsolete biology awkwardly being out of touch with the times.


It's funny how we can recognize the disastrous impulses and urges we feel as purely biological yet are hopelessly subjected to their rule. Essentially, we are putty in our own hands, we are in a masochistic,dominatrix relationship with an far outdated ,governing biology. Don't look at me as if I have a solution, I don't. Even though I recognize that my attraction to big tits is simply due to my lizard brain telling me this is what I should find attractive, I still actually feel like its something more and am helplessly stuck in its gravitational pull.

I cannot stand to believe that I live in a world where people endure physical torture brought about by other humans. There are people in the world who will torture others, we live amongst them. Any given person, when asked about how they come to terms with knowing the abhorrent act of torture exist in the world, would most likely explain how they find it deeply appalling but none-the-less feel completely safe and protected in where they live and in their current vicinity, maybe also go as far to explain how torture will usually occur in times of war, extreme crisis such, where millions of live on the line will cause people to go to extreme lengths to gain helpful information. Although it would seem that most of the torture that has occurred in the time span of the human epoch has occurred during times of war torture grounds itself everywhere, despite the vehement denial we would face when hearing this. Just the other day on new there was a story about a sado-masochistic, satanic love duo that had kidnapped an elderly woman from her home, she was mutilated and raped for a week until they killed her. I know that if I were to talk to someone about this they would become mad and afraid of ME and not the idea that this is the world they live in, that is what they should become mad at. People cannot accept this terrible truth and instead subscribe strongly and blindly to the just world fallacy. I wouldn't bring a child into a world where torture exist, it's fucked m8.

>>7497809

Particles if fucking awesome. It's this thick, frothy mixture of honest social observation, philosophy, and sci-fi, and all of these separate sub-genres are articulated and well constructed within the story creating this synergistic literary experience. read it

Let me put it this way; either there is no possible objective morality or reproduction is wrong.

>>7498297
Or morality is objective because of God and he said be fruitful and multiply.

>>7498578
Then he is an asshole

>>7498622
Why?

>>7498625
Because he made a fucking gauntlet just to run his little lego men and hotwheels through. That is the only conception of god I can imagine, some child playing with his toys whose suffering he has no comprehension or compassion for. Thats why all the good guys go to the good place and all the bad guys suffer forever and ever and ever

>>7498646
Five minutes of inconvience in exchange for literal eternity of bliss if you're not a complete cunt.

Wow such a bad deal.

>>7498699
Except the vast majority of humanity is bound for the bad place

>>7498578
Be fruitful and multiply is not a commandment though. Even if it is then it applied specifically to Adam and Eve but it was never written that it was a sin to no reproduce. If that were the case then all these priests and votaries would go to hell in spite of a whole life of observation and if that is the case then basically everyone is fucked (but not literally).

>>7498736
It's easy not to be a cunt. Even if they are a cunt sometimes they can repent. Even if they fuck up they can repent again.

It's really not that hard. There's not a person in the world who hasn't heard of Christianity, they all got the message, they just don't want to be nice, don't be a cunt, follow a few rules, live a good life and then go have eternal bliss.

>>7498753
True, but he certainly doesn't advocate antinatalism though.

>>7498830
So only normies get to have eternal bliss because its not like you can have a poor life and not be a cunt at once right?

>>7498873
Why couldn't you? Poverty doesn't stop you from being a good person.

>>7498929
Thats my point dipshit. You underline the ridiculousness of your whole position because you speak of salvation as if it is the icing on your normie cake.

>yeah, heaven sounds pretty cool. After my privileged western life of no-adversity I can just go up to heaven. All I have to do is not kill or steal or hurt anyone and why would I? My life is rockin'

The only argument for antinatalism is a failing of the categorical imperative

>>7497572
BTFO, this is genius

>>7496436
lie down and die pleb

I didn't ask to be born, dad!!!

>>7499281
Thats an argument for antinatalism

File: laughing_women.jpg (377KB, 2031x1478px) Image search: [Google]

377KB, 2031x1478px

>>7492187
>He still hasn't realized that he's the microcosm
>2015

>>7499301
you're an argument for antinatalism!

i'm sorry that was mean i'm sure you're a cool person

>>7497939
Thanks, I'll get on it!

>>7499012
Even if you do have a life of adversity it's less than the blink of an eye compared to the bliss of eternity. It's nearly nothing.

>>7498699
Except this is a lie sold to you by your elders in order to make you behave as they wish.

So it's really a load of horseshit

>>7499973
See, here's this lie that just lets you thoughtlessly dismiss the suffering of anyone anywhere and it makes you look like a nonsympathetic cunt. I wish hell were real just for you scumsucking fagboy

>>7496828
He's simply stating that it's inefficient. You can try and convince someone that the only purpose of life is to suffer, and to safe that suffering for an unborn would be moral, but there's nothing stopping a person from being selfish, giving birth to a child to have a legacy.
Actively killing people to make sure people never reproduce is more efficient and effectively makes sure people are no longer born. Because there is also nothing stopping an antinatalist from saying he will follow the doctrine and then change his mind to have children. Suicide and killing others is the more direct solution.

I personally don't care what others do nor do I care if others are born or not.

>>7491849
pain isn't inherently bad

>>7500040
I don't dismiss it, it's just than in the greater picture this little earthly life isn't so much to bear.

>>7500035
Even if that were so, the proposed way to behave is still very good on its own.

>>7497572
But life is inherently more beneficial than harmful. With the scant exceptions of people who live severely traumatic lives, the good outweighs the bad.

If the good did NOT outweigh the bad, nobody would choose to have children.

>>7497850
tl;dr

Think of someone you love.

You have now disproven antinatalism.

>>7497850
Nobodies looking at you mate.

Go outside ya out of shape bastard.

>>7500565
That's the same kind of "reasoning" people use when they call others selfish for not having children. Having never existed is not the same as dying.

>>7492111
You fail to see the beauty in this though. It means we have to keep moving forward. Our minds and bodies will not allow us to stagnate. Dull, compliant comfort is not enough. Staying still is not an option. We must always push ourselves to go farther, to be stronger, smarter, and faster. As individuals and humanity our only future is forward.

File: 1450937782565.gif (1MB, 167x170px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 167x170px

>>7492161
This entire post reeks of the No true Scotsman fallacy. Shoo shoo, pseudo-intellectual.

File: images.jpg (9KB, 237x213px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 237x213px

>>7497850
>Even though I recognize that my attraction to big tits is simply due to my lizard brain telling me this is what I should find attractive, I still actually feel like its something more and am helplessly stuck in its gravitational pull.
There's no reason why the biological should stop at the biological. Rather than staying out of the force, ride it, move with it, create something different from it. Life means to reproduce, living as a human means making humanity bigger.

"The purpose of discipline is to live more fully; not less."

>>7500482
It is? All of the benefits of life are satiation of needs. Needs are deficits that either go unfulfilled and the results are gruesome or they are fulfilled through some highly ephemeral means of satiation. Every time you are hungry, the implications of that are pretty insidious. I mean think about it, its your body's death counter starting up. Even going hungry for a week can have long term medical effects. Anything that could possibly be seen as fundamentally beneficial against non-existence is inherently illusory because humanity is just a bundle of debt.

But if that is too floaty to be convincing then just look at the price of procreation. First think about all the diseases and disorders someone can be born with from type one diabetes to anemia to schizophrenia and a whole litany of mental impairments. But it doesn't just end there because countless accidents and malices can also fall upon someone throughout their life and how are the parents any less responsible for those? This would kind of be like putting someone in some sort of torture chair hooked up to a switchboard where 30% or more of the outcomes were agonizing torture and the others were a mild spanking followed by a swift death. How is gambling with another person's life in any way moral? If we were having this conversation in Ghana, where the numbers would look much worse, you'd still defend your selfish reproductive rights because you are a stupid animal who ultimately doesn't allow his morals to run counter to base needs and wants. And the lack of suicide is hardly any attestation to how inherently good life is but rather resembles the modality
of any addiction. We don't think of heroin as good because of the junkie's absolute drive to attain more heroin.

And really its as simple as this. You cannot deprive a nonentity of existence. Even if existence is some great thing there is nothing fundamentally wrong about not creating new creatures to experience it because they are not staring through a window at the YOLO party wondering where their invite is. All you can really do in creating a child is give expression to some internal ego-drive. There is nothing altruistic about creating life

>>7500672
You are stupid beyond words

>>7500482
>the decision to have children is the product of reason
L M A O
do you know anything about life?

>>7500826
Excellent rebuttal.

>>7500672
Five star post.

File: 8c3.jpg (146KB, 496x496px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 496x496px

>>7500672
Your argument boils down to wanting pleasure without any kind of pain, i.e. being a bitch-nigga. Kill yourself or just live.

>>7500920
You're fuckin dumb, that's not what he said at all

>>7500920
If pain is so good then I should be allowed to inflict it right? I mean what if people became stronger because of the horrible things I did to them. My actions are just more contingent obstacles that help other people grow.

File: 1445366817079.png (430KB, 800x500px) Image search: [Google]

430KB, 800x500px

>>7500944
No, that's pretty much his whole argument.

"Oh, feeding myself is such a drag, why can't my body magically sustain itself forever?"

"Oh, this cold is so horrible, why aren't humans the only form of life that exist?"

"Oh, kids are so whiny, why do I even get horny?"

You people are getting trolled by your brain. You're surrounded by a huge amount of pleasure so all you can think about is the bad things that will happen eventually; because of course you don't mind having that pleasure. If you could, you would live with only pleasure, so you look how to and finding it is impossible, you desire to resign life, since you wish to avoid pain.

But the truth is that you really don't care about getting rid of others' pain at all, otherwise you would be helping people right now instead of being on 4chan; you only care about your own pain and how sad it's going to make you when your kids cry because they don't have a new toy. But you don't care about the animals killed every day to feed us, about the mountains destroyed to make our houses, about the constantly dying stars, et cetera. Your mind only occupies itself, as it should, on avoiding bad things in the future.

>>7501093
Look dumbass you can't go around "allievieating the pain" of everyone. That's rude. Maybe they don't want help. It's beside the point anyhow, you tryna be edgy but you're so verbose it's just dull.

It's a physiological fact that people feel pain more intensely than pleasure. Dumbass.

>>7501093
No I didn't say that. It seems like the idea of a universe where human existence is essential by any rational standards is remote. If my body magically sustained all its needs I would not exist anyway because I would have the functionality of a rock. But since I already exist and I am living on human terms I a, caught in the cycle of addiction woth the rest of you jokers. Hell, I even believe in a hard day's work.

>>7491849
nah

I am not an antinatalist but I do notice how this subject brings out the worst in people. Usually arguments end up with people telling the antis they should commit suicide in a really passive aggressive way. And that might be expected on the asshole of the internet, but I have followed this topic on many different forums and some of these appear to be more or less civil and mature.