/lit/ - Literature

>>16933574
>I must prevent others from practicing their ability to perpetuate the species because my own existence has heretofore been bad and so I project this experience onto others

>>16825996
If you are biologically hardwired not to kill yourself, then you do not care about preventing pain as much as you care about acquiring pleasure.

>cease perpetuating the cycle of meaningless suffering
You are the one who chooses to view the suffering as meaningless.

>we could convince enough people to wipe out all life using advanced futuristic weaponry
Not only is it unlikely to wipe out all life, the people that spread these ideas are usually too depressed and dysfunctional to spread them, let alone actually make a change in the world. Additionally, life would just start all over again, raising different problems. It's an exercise in futility, and a scientific pipe dream (unless you basically believe in a God that follows your beliefs, or that we can make such a "god").

"You are biologically hardwired not to kill yourself." Then how are you going to convince other people to wipe out life, if they are "biologically hardwired" against such wanton massacre? It's basically anti-utopianism, and it's just as unlikely.

>>16826084
>suffering is grounded in objective reality
By this, you mean it is an immediate reality.

>we have some sort of ability to acquire meaning despite everything scientifically known going against this
Then I have just disproven the modern scientific corpus by acquiring meaning.

>suffering is intrinsically bad by its' very definition
Genetically alter or hardwire yourself so that you don't feel suffering, then. If you are such a science ass-kisser, it should be possible.

>but a biological mechanism to distract from our purposelessness
By this, you mean that it is our purpose.

>Our morality, unlike natalists, is founded on a mix of empathy AND understanding the universe, retard,
If you really were empathetic, you would be doing more than arguing against "natalism" and "meaning." For one, you wouldn't call others names. You would also be alleviating suffering while you are here in life. Of course, Christianity also has empathy and an understanding of the universe, it is nihilistic scientianity-followers that have lost one indispensable mode of understanding.

>that's why we advocate for nonexistence as an escape from it all.
Who's buying? There are many ways out of suffering, some harder to sell than others. Have fun convincing others to "terminate all life" like some kind of demented borg when we are "biologically hardwired" to disagree with you.

>did i choose to be a coward who can't kill herself?
You choose to be by continuing to be, without improving yourself. You are biologically hardwired, but if you cared you could overcome your biology.

>fatalism
>no one actually chooses anything
Did you choose to make this post? Do you have this little self control?

>>16760347
>It can free you from unnecessary ambitions that only breed misery and slavery
Yes, it is instrumental, but the problem is that under pessimism all ambitions are unnecessary, and of course, being done in life, breed misery and slavery. That they do positive things is ignored; that one can merely strengthen oneself until one is no longer so afflicted by life is also utterly ignored.

A self-proclaimed "pessimist" or "optimist" will always be an idiot, because he never applies only these things.

>It sets out to accomplish reaching the truth and it succeeds to do so
A truth that is relative to the person, apparently. It finds truths that we all already know, but gives them a negative tint, as if that is necessary and not based on one's own misanthropy and issues.

>>16760270
Also, stop thinking within the confines of autistic "premises and fallacies," you're just losing sight of the point. The point was that the guardian must practice what is beneficial to the city, and dedicate himself to the city.

>"very precisely be craftsmen of the city's freedom and practice nothing other than what tends to city"
To be a craftsman of the city's freedom and to practice that which tends to the city means to imitate courage, moderation, holiness, freedom, etcetera. The man must not imitate anything else, which would be slavishness, shamefulness, etcetera.

>"Practice" when speaking about craftsmanships is referring to practicing crafts
"Craftsman" is figurative here. You cannot craft a city's freedom as you would craft a table, or a tool. In short, the man must give up all other occupations or plans and set his mind only towards earning the city's freedom, and PRACTICING (doing) only what aids the city; to imitate goodness tends to the city, and aids the "craftmanship" of the city's freedom.

>>16595411

>>16305125

>>15345276
>Yes, shit like Fibrodysplasia epidermolysis bullosa really builds character
The point still stands

>>15342459
No you can't. Life can always exist and people will always choose to reproduce even if you don't. Furthermore, animals, plants, and other living beings will also exist so you have to be an antinatalist for all life, an impossible position unless you try to eradicate all life, also an impossible position. If AN and efilists are too impotent to even gather in public and protest, how can they be expected to painlessly end life (for to do so painfully would violate their base utilitarian axioms, and all efforts are doomed to be incomplete either way)?

>>15283241
>anti-natalist bugmen
CRINGE

>>15277308
Copes aren't intrinsically bad, if "bad" even exists.

>>15277790
It's too late. By spreading anti-natalism, you're doing the same.

>>15278030
His argument is one that I've heard. It is not that other life forms don't suffer, but that we have more venues of suffering open to us due to our complex brains and the "existential crises" and other such sufferings it begets.

>>15278776
If I was into CBT, I would do that and I'd, in turn, derive pleasure from it. Not all suffering is bad because some suffering can beget pleasure

>>15278915
How do you ground your axiom, that "pain is bad and pleasure is good?" What is your justification for it aside from "pain hurts and pleasure makes me feel good?" What if I lobotomize you? What if you're born with a condition that causes you not to feel physical pain? Then pain doesn't hurt, or can't be felt; the same is with pleasure.

>>15279123
>JUST FOLLOW MY PARADIGM
>no no NO WHAT DO YOU MEAN, WHY "IS IT BAD," JUST ACCEPT MY PARADIGM AND SHUT UP
Why do you need to outweigh the "not good" in order to bring a life into existence?

>you point the discussion nowhere
It already was pointing nowhere because it's founded on false presuppositions. You guys are like vegans when it comes to argumentation. You have your presuppositions all set up and hate it when they're questioned

>>15279177
Why is it bad that we don't think suffering is bad? Is this an unethical belief? According to what ethical model?

>>15279199
Why is it a good thing to be a "normal person?" What is a normal person? Someone who thinks like you? Can you know what a normal person is, with your skewed perspective?

Furthermore, what if the child was unconscious during the rape? Is it fine to rape you (with a condom) in your sleep or in a coma because you can't feel anything?

>>15279286
Why does humanity matter? Why should we be humane?

>>15279478
This is like saying competitions are bad because there are winners and losers, holy shit. Like, do you want a gift basket and a participation trophy from God after death? It is not unjust that some suffer for their actions while others do not.

>>15279598
Get on our level, I guess
>muh sophism

>>15279585
>Why is suffering bad?
>Because suffering is bad!
>this isn't circular and fallacious, it's just that you're exercising in abstract logic and sophism

>you think suffering isn't bad, well what if I raped you/ [insert bad thing here]?

If suffering is all that matters you can justify all sorts of heinous acts so long as people don't notice it.

>>15279636
>No, suffering is bad by definition
Why?

"Four sides" and "bad" are not the same whatsoever. I can see that a square has four sides, but it is not self-evident that "suffering is bad." Your assumption that it is an analytic a priori is flawed; I can't ask why a rhombus has four sides (because a shape with four sides is a rhombus), while suffering and bad are two completely different things. "Bad" is a moral evil/ something to be avoided

>>15273776
And now the anti-natalist succumbs to his brain-fog, turning instead to curt replies.

>me strong aryan wurld builda on anime forum!
>me virtuous AN frogposter on anime forum!

>kek, I am the arbitrary one.
Finally, you admit it

>And I don't care about licking the boots of nature.
Except that's what you're doing every minute of your life, simply by living. It's just that it's too hard to kill yourself, as if it isn't too hard for others to not reproduce. Just admit that you are an anti-natalist because it's easy. Perhaps you are asexual, or an incel like Elliot Rodgers who wished to stop everyone from reproducing because he couldn't.

>If you would ACTUALLY belief that, you would have as MANY children as possible.
So then natalists are virtuous because they are not having as many children as they possibly can (probably numbering in the hundreds, even more if you take into account artificial methods of reproduction). Therefore, the difference between an anti-natalist and a natalist who has a few children is like the difference between not punching someone and lightly tapping someone.

>Having children is self gratification at the utmost form
It still boggles my mind how anti-natalists think they can argue about what families and fathers are like without ever having started a family. It's like thinking to yourself, as a white guy, that all blacks are one-dimensional murder machines.

>Don't let your self hate projection out on me
And in another post, an anon described how anti-natalism is narcissistic because it strokes the ego and allows you to spend money and time on vidya and movies and whatever inane shit it is you like to consume as you wait for death because you're too much of a milquetoast to commit to difficult beliefs like those of the Church of Euthanasia, efilism, or just plain offing yourself.

>A person who is free of self-gratification would never think about "spreading muh glorious genes".
How so?

>the purpose of life is happiness
Why?

>And you are a retarded faggot
Don't let your self hate projection out on him

>>15152452
Can you experience the lack of suffering in non-existence?

>>15152465
Benatar is a Jew, and only self-hating environ(mental)ist whites will take his poison to heart. The masses of virile immigrants don't give two shits about his effete "ethics."

>>15152471
> If there's nothing, life isn't worth it
Yes.

>If there's something and it's less terrible than life, then life isn't worth it
Unless living is a prerequisite for that "less terrible something," and there is a pre-existence (you don't start existing upon conception and then go to an afterlife).

> if there's something and it's more terrible than life, then life is worth something.
Yes

Of course, it's not this simple. These possibilities are not all equally likely, and worth is subjective (some call it delusion, but it's still real for those believe in it, or real enough to get them to trudge through a "miserable life").

>>15139499
Why is this a bad thing? Furthermore, why are all these things that you speak of real? "Wellspring of being" and other Eastern ideas? Why should I abandon one myth for another?

>>15109778
>NOOOOOOOOO WHY WONT WOMEN FUCK ME "it must be because anti-natalism is true not that i'm a loser in life'
anti-natalism is a philosophical dead, never mind a literal dead end

Why do antinatalists keep proselytising their cult of extinction where ever they tread? Literally everything in their sad existence revolves around asking people to engage in debate and a ‘refute me bro’ fest.

>>13875457
>breeders
yep its definitely him

>>13780591
anti-natalism is a philosophical dead, never mind a literal dead end

>this thread in a nutshell

Cuck: The philosophy

>Cuck: The Philosophy

this sums up anti-natalists perfectly