>Antagonist wants to wipe out humanity so they can end all

wow such edge I don't wanna fuk wit u

>>379418901
No edge here, just logic.

Suffering is a negative that should be avoided.
Life guaranties suffering.
Life does not guarantee pleasure sufficient to equal or surpass that suffering.

Therefore, if a humane way of exterminating humanity could be devised, it would be the moral thing to do.

>>379419260
If you use negative utilitarian moral theory, anyway. However, most consequentialists subscribe to preference utilitarianism or other theories (as the true moral theory, two-level utilitarianism however is often considered the better theory to follow in everyday life given how ill-suited brain is to calculate utility), you probably should read some of those rebuttals (the common ones described briefly in Wikipedia article of negative utilitarianism).

>>379419260
Why is suffering a negative?

>>379419260
t. child

>Suffering is a negative

>>379420109
It is inherently by it's very definition?

>>379419260
>actual supervillains exist

>>379420379
Not really, no.

>shadowrun dragonfall
>Antagonist has a fairly reasonable point and genuinely wishes to do good
>You can actually join him and you grt a special ending

>>379420379
Then why does it give me an erection?

>>379420569

a riveting rebuttal, anon

>>379420798
What's there to say? You didn't offer proof, you just claimed that suffering is inherently bad.

>>379419260
>Life does not guarantee pleasure sufficient to equal or surpass that suffering.

>implying that couldn't be a perception error or even the result of one's lack of contribution
>implying suffering isn't a karmic mechanism by which dumb ass human animals can learn from their mistakes

You may have suffered a bit too much and need assistance, or, are looking at the world and your life through the wrong lens.

>>379420569
They're practically synonymous.

For one guy being called a man might make him feel good about himself, but if he got his dick cut off it would cause suffering. For another, they might want to have that happen, and being called a man would cause them to suffer. It's all relative, with the only constant being that we all have to deal with it at some point.

>>379420869

>what is an axiom

>>379420970
Sure, in that case I deny that there is objective suffering in the world

File: Smug.jpg (14KB, 300x358px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 300x358px

>>379420996
Good luck with that

>>379420798
It's a very immature way of looking at things
Without suffering, there's no joy
Without challenge, there's no growth

>>379418743
Arcanum

>>379421110
>muh non-existence through music
lol

>>379421143
>Without suffering, there's no joy
>Without challenge, there's no growth

You aren't wrong, it's just that at the end of the day the negative side will outweigh the positive side in 99.99~% cases.

>antinatalism
Head to /sci/ to get dismantled in a coherent manner, if you're open to it that is. Almost none of them are. This is the face of your average AN https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NplH5Z80yik

>>379420996
Objective suffering exists even on an interpersonal level.
You have to separate the reality and the perceptions.

>>379421609
It's all just emotions, what makes one more or less bad than another?

File: damn shame.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>379418743
You can ask to join Solas in Inquisition, but the dumbass will reject your aid. He could literally get his spies and shit in other nations under the guise of working with the Inquisition and get a powerful ally. Solas is a retarded villain, and he deserves to lose.

>>379421450
>the negative side will outweigh the positive side in 99.99~% cases
Why? Because you say so? If you think life isn't worth living there's an easy way out anon.

>>379421450
How so?

>>379421343
>muh butthurt will
lol

File: 0euroa.jpg (40KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 800x600px

>>379421551
>/sci/
Thanks for the laugh, anon

>>379421641
The same thing that separates water and acid being poured on your skin.

>>379421762
People fear death because of their primitive animal nature, and will struggle against life instead of taking the path they should rationally come to. They need someone who sees to truth of things to... help them along, as a parent does with their child. It would be selfish to just leave them writhing in the mud as they are now, no?

>>379422062
Literally just flavors of emotion and consequential utility. It's impossible to objectively assign good and bad to emotions. You can make it axiomatically bad, but it would be pure opinion at that point.

>>379418743
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CK15w04zgg
Just lose a final fight with a boss it would be the same.

>>379421981
You're right, those idiots can't appreciate an idea like antinatalism like /v/ can

>>379422082
You're clearly past your primitive animal nature. Go ahead and do us proud anon.
Also if you're going to shoot up a school would you mind shouting that you're doing it in the name of Allah?

File: 1359865657652.png (334KB, 710x478px) Image search: [Google]

334KB, 710x478px

>>379418743
>Not getting a mostly-masochistic, vaguely-sexual high from your own suffering

You have a lot to learn.

>>379422341
/v/ supports antinatalism, just not by choice.

>>379422271
Give me something that is axiomatically bad which is not an emotion and I will draw a parallel to anguish and the like.

>>379418743

Bible Black

>>379422648
>do my job for me
lolno

File: schop.png (186KB, 300x358px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 300x358px

What are you doing on /v/ Schopenhauer?

>>379419260
>Life does not guarantee pleasure sufficient to equal or surpass that suffering.
But that's not logic, that's just a sad person making dumb generalizations

>>379419260
Your are right at some point, but instinct of the self preserve is stronger.

File: Plague Inc.jpg (539KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

539KB, 1920x1080px

Or you can just be the antagonist.

>>379422773
I don't know, your issue seems to be that something cannot be naturally good or bad. I'm not really in the mood to discuss something to boorish just because you feel like being irritating. Sue me.

>>379419260
Ow that edge

>>379422812
Who are not a sad person life is suffering because life feeds on life and hunt or be hunted.

>>379422963
This thread was stupidly reductive philosophy from the start, I see no reason to believe that anyone in here is anything but a pedant.

>>379422271
Going back to the water and acid falling on a person example (no human cause stated as a given, directly or indirectly),

Water falling on a human person is objectively inconsequential. The water will cycle through nature. A person can perceive that as many things and react emotionally. Happy, reminds them of playing in the water. Sad, reminds them of tears. Etc.

Acid falling on a person objectively causes suffering via damaged tissue and health, etc. But even this could be perceived as a positive to someone that likes pain or harm, with the appropriate emotional response. However, the person's perception and emotional reaction do not change the fact that the event is harmful.

If you believe that's relative and the acid is either a neutral or positive event, we need to be having a different discussion.

>>379422812

So you are saying that life guarantees something other than life and the death at the end of it.

>>379423081
Your lack of punctuation is suffering.
Also prove that pain in life outweighs the pleasure.

>>379423171
Of course it's relative. What does harmful mean in this context? That their life will be shorter? That they are less capable of achieving certain goals? Both of those are obviously relative in their value.

>>379423341
Pleasure is symply drug that cause addiction. Look on the fat land whale people at least.

>>379422963
>your issue seems to be that something cannot be naturally good or bad.
Good and bad are based on measures of desirability, which necessitate an observer and their biases. The one function all life can and will share is the translation of entropy into information, the existence of suffering does not invalidate that. The purposes an agent may or may not create for themselves are also dependent on their own will, and may not involve suffering either. Almost every angle of antinatalism, from the "lack of consent" to the "intrinsic bad" definition of suffering relies on indefensible, universal premises that constantly trip over linguistic issues. Head to a philosophy or science forum instead of trying to act smart on gaming message boards and Youtube; you'll get a reality check.

>>379423341
>live a life of pure pleasure
>die
you suffer even more at the end of it all

>>379423341
Don't people naturally feel pain more acutely than pleasure since the former is a better teacher? If a person had an equal amount of good things and bad things (from their own perspective) I would say they felt more suffering in their life over all.

>>379422954
So which species of ape would /v/ choose to supply not that I don't already know the answer .

File: 1494530982862.jpg (73KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 1000x1000px

>>379419260
I think about this all the time and it's pretty much the only logical conclusion you can come to. Every being in the universe has the duty to destroy themselves. Or at the very least to not reproduce so as not to propogate further suffering. Of course human self-preservation instinct is strong as fuck so even people who understand this will have difficulty actually following through with it. Anyone who disagrees with this is either too stupid to think logically without their instinctual biases clouding their judgement, or a religious or "spiritual" person who intentionally ignores true statements because it makes them feel bad.
*tips fedora*

>>379423569
Pain is simply a reaction that allows you to continue existing. Look on babies who can't feel pain at least.

>>379423765
All experiences are axiomatically positive

fite me

>>379423765
>Every being in the universe has the duty to destroy themselves. Or at the very least to not reproduce so as not to propogate further suffering.
If you presuppose negative utilitarianism (read a book), okay

>>379421551
Please point me towards a thread that dismantles antinatalism. Without any shit about natural instinct, muh white race, posting examples of ugly people who believe it, etc. I am actually genuinely interested in this because I don't believe there is any logical argument that can possibly be made against it..

>>379423909

t. /sci/ monkey

>>379423792
>Pain is simply a reaction that allows you to continue existing.
Right also it teach you you fear and teach subduction. Look on the slaves in the history book.

>>379423992
Just read this
>>379423628

>>379423765
Ahh... Just think of it, the utter, eternal, engulfing peace of non existence that awaits beyond the grave.

And we're held away from it for decades because of the wretched beast inside of use that strives to kill and consume any other life around it, while creating copies of itself which will only suffer the same fate.

>>379424069

That's a whole lot of words to write for nothing of substance. Which essay generator you got that from?

>>379420379
nothing is inherent

>>379423992
>because I don't believe there is any logical argument that can possibly be made against it..
Dear lord dude, just Google it. I'm not going to lay the floor for you to attack someone else's argument and then ask me to defend it.
>>379424069
Not even, his problem is that he can't even see why others wouldn't consider negative utilitarianism. He needs to read >>379420053

>>379424332

Magic exists

>>379423321
I said no such thing, I'm just saying the anon I replied to is wrong when he said suffering is guaranteed and outweighs the pleasures of life. Saying everyone is miserable and would be better off dead isn't logical, it's not even edgy it's plain dumb

>>379424461
Do we all have leprechauns living inside us? Yes.

File: 1459919021389.png (2MB, 1910x1420px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1910x1420px

>>379419260
But without sadness there wouldn't be happiness, and vice versa, thus there not being suffering. Physical pain is merely a sign of our bodies trying to make us run away/fight so we can survive, thus if we erase emotional pain wouldn't we reach the same conclusion of erasure of suffering? So rather than erasing humanity itself, we should erase the emotions of humans.

>>379424069
None of the stuff in that post argues that I shouldn't be antinatalist. Only that there's no objective measure of "good" and "bad" which natalism can fall under (which is true of everything anyway).
What I'm asking is why anyone would disagree with me not wanting to reproduce, and to not have any kids around me. I don't care about objective morals, just my own selfish desires, so can you tell me what's incorrect about this thinking?

>>379424504
>I said no such thing
By making that statement you did.

File: 1496494738224.png (805KB, 900x1008px) Image search: [Google]

805KB, 900x1008px

>>379424254
Stop teasing me anon. I swear one day I'm gonna do it.

File: BEYOND GOOD AND EVIL.jpg (7KB, 257x196px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 257x196px

>>379420379
DELET THIS

File: Maxresdefaultiv.jpg (156KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 1920x1080px

SMT IV

>>379424970
No I didn't

>>379423471
More or less, factual suffering to an entity in the universe. The ends might be relative, but the cause is most certainly not.

>>379425176
Well you did and the fact that you don't understand it makes you pretty fucking dumb.

>>379425091
The White were right!
The White were right!
The White were right!

>>379425392
>ends
Better phrasing:
the utility

Utility is relative.

>>379424861
>None of the stuff in that post argues that I shouldn't be antinatalist
It argues that antinatalism isn't the agent determining universal you think it is.
>What I'm asking is why anyone would disagree with me not wanting to reproduce, and to not have any kids around me. I don't care about objective morals, just my own selfish desires, so can you tell me what's incorrect about this thinking?
Nothing, though I'd wonder how you ended up at relativism through all this. If you subscribe to negative utilitarianism, go for it (there are counterarguments to it, which I'd advise you read). But if you think that it's the ultimate pejorative of life to eliminate suffering and nothing else, and that all agents should subscribe to this ideology, you're an idiot.
Look dude, I can tell you're actually taking this seriously so I wasn't funposting when I said to take a look elsewhere. Observe both ends of the spectrum (though hardcore antinatalists get really, really ugly I'm warning you) and consider all sides- including the very real threat to the ideology that is alien life and universal expansion. It's a broad topic and nobody's going to convince you within the scope of a /v/ thread.

>>379425435
I didn't and the fact you think I did makes you the dumb one. Let me try to simplify the exchange for you:
>anon: life guarantees suffering but not enough pleasure to outweigh it
>me: that's wrong
>anon: so life guarantees something else than life and death?
>me: that's not what I said
>anon: yes it is
>me: no it isn't
>anon: yes it is you're dumb
>me: no it isn't you're dumb and here's why

>>379418743
The "negative endings" (aka plunging the world into darkness) could quite possibly be cannon. The thing is that your choice, the act itself, and the aftermath are irrelevant simply because it's part of a cycle. Also, in each way all choices are the asshole choice.

File: you.jpg (23KB, 600x484px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 600x484px

>>379425891
>But that's not logic, that's just a sad person making dumb generalizations
the irony is palpable.

File: 3035027-fou.lu.full.291961.jpg (1MB, 2031x1336px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2031x1336px

>be an ancient demigod emperor who led his empire to prosperity and technological marvels
>need to take a break for a few hundreds of years, go to sleep
>when you wake up, nobody expects you but soldiers, you get wounded multiple times because you're still weak
>end up travelling your own country on foot seeing how greatly it degraded under human rule, to a point of becoming a militaristic shithole that is quite a horrible place to live in
>all people are backstabbing assholes
>meet a girl who tries her hardest to make you feel better
>except she gets caught, tortured and used as an ammo for nuclear magic cannon aimed at you
Was he right in going nuclear and deciding to genocide all humans starting history anew?
You can even join him.

>>379426884
I'll redirect you to line 3 of >>379419260

>>379420708
This.
I was quite surprised Dragonfall let you do that.
Too bad it ended the way it did, but anything else and people might've started treating it as the canon ending.
Fuck dragons.

>>379426848
3 thoughts occur, knowing nothing of the game:

1. What biases did he have and did he consider consequences in the course of his decisions?
2. Demigod - not an absolute moral authority.
3. And since when was mass killing ever a good solution? Ask Hitler, or the Middle East.