>suffering isn't bad Antinatalism defeated in 3 words.

File: 110 KB, 483x345, HB0gUvKv8_HL1iVB1P5OxaVNQ9DjcSGIviv4GfzgafI.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Mon May 4 23:21:43 2020 No.15277214 [Reply] [Original]

>suffering isn't bad
Antinatalism defeated in 3 words.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:25:41 2020 No.15277243 Antibatalists wont listen because they’re depressive infants with an sjw mentality.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:26:38 2020 No.15277247 >>15277214 >suffering isn't bad but I wont explain why, the jewish book told me

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:26:58 2020 No.15277249 Life isn't purely suffering, and the entire purpose is growth and learning.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:27:55 2020 No.15277256 >>15277214 Why would a person be against suffering? That's where all the good stuff in life comes from.

Anonymous Mon May 4 23:30:51 2020 No.15277266

>>15277247
I don’t need a desert book to know that life isn’t completely suffering constantly like antinatalist losers think it is. Even if I did think it was I’d just kill myself instead of whining on /lit/ and saying that everyone else shouldn’t have kids. I don’t even know why antinatalists think I should be concerned if others suffer

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:32:01 2020 No.15277278 >>15277256 It's slowly but surely dawning on me that not only is suffering not bad, but it may very well be good.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:32:58 2020 No.15277279 The real question is: Is the good of pleasure more good, than the bad of displeasure is bad? Because if it is, it completely justifies procreation and making as many people as possible as the fleeting pleasures always outweigh the displeasure.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:35:41 2020 No.15277297 >>15277279 Displeasure isn't bad though.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:37:10 2020 No.15277306 >>15277297 Displeasure is bad by definition, it's an analytic a priori

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:37:12 2020 No.15277308 >>15277249 Growth and learning are cope.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:39:58 2020 No.15277329 >>15277306 No, it isn't >analytic a priori Doesn't exist

Anonymous Mon May 4 23:40:10 2020 No.15277332
File: 1.31 MB, 1920x1080, 1531950724896.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15277214
The only thing true (certain) in life is suffering. This very fact is what also gives meaning, to overcome suffering is what made the Western man reach for the stars

Imagine if we were living inside the matrix, plugged into masturbation machines like our Jewish overlords want us to? Life would be meaningless in its essence

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:41:28 2020 No.15277340 >>15277214 anti-natalism doesn't have to be from a utilitarian/hedonistic angle, you could argue we have an ethical imperative to stop having so many children regardless of whether it affects suffering. Overpopulation is a very real threat.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:41:34 2020 No.15277342 >>15277306 Good things can come from bad experiences

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:41:43 2020 No.15277344 >>15277308 It's the entire purpose of a human life

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:41:49 2020 No.15277345 >>15277329 >>analytic a priori >Doesn't exist incredibly retarded statement

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:44:02 2020 No.15277361 >>15277332 Lol reaching for the stars just means you want to turn the universe into a masturbation machine instead, European rationality has already conquered the world and this is all you're going to get, Walmart planets forever.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:44:05 2020 No.15277363 This thread will be a good way of separating White men and the rest

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:45:08 2020 No.15277369 >>15277345 Not as retarded as affirming the existence of analytic a priori propositions.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:45:37 2020 No.15277372 >>15277369 >All squares have four sides is a retarded statement literal retard

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:48:36 2020 No.15277395 File: 89 KB, 918x1024, 1588270425416.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15277361 The European man is in hibernation right now

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:52:33 2020 No.15277412 File: 12 KB, 188x273, pyrrho_large.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15277214 Based and Pyrrho pilled

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:53:15 2020 No.15277419 >>15277214 is there a difference in being an antinatalist and just not wanting to have children because it is simply something i don't want to do?

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:53:57 2020 No.15277425 >>15277372 >recourse to historical and conventional process to demonstrate his eternal proof Yes, analytic a prioris are literally retarded.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:55:15 2020 No.15277430 File: 58 KB, 489x623, d20.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15277419 Yes, you are what we would call a nu-male, Soi Cuck

Anonymous Mon May 4 23:55:16 2020 No.15277431

>>15277419
Yes. You simply don't want to cause yourself any more suffering and headaches and heartbreaks because you deep down know there is inherent loss built into the whole idea. The Anti faction is mad at mom and dad for not giving them a perfect life.

>>	Anonymous Mon May 4 23:58:20 2020 No.15277447 File: 108 KB, 1200x640, 164262347377777.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Suffering comes from our own bad interpretations of reality, if we learn to accept the world the way it is, we don't suffer

Anonymous Tue May 5 00:21:18 2020 No.15277583

>>15277214
I disagree and am far from an antinatalist.
A better argument against it is that it's a fruitless abstinence as people will just do it anyway, and it's better to work with that and make the world a better place than to end our very way of life and just die off.
Antinatalism as well as veganism seem to arise from an inability to cope with the existence of evil.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 00:26:19 2020 No.15277618 >>15277395 Infantile cope. You'll get ass fucked by financial interests and call it democratic values like you always do

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 00:28:10 2020 No.15277627 >>15277266 i agree, antinatalism only works as a personal preference rather than a moral doctrine. it's about not wanting your own potential kids to suffer

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 00:29:43 2020 No.15277634 >>15277279 Utilitarians who think you can just apply some kind of arithmetic to the human experience are probably some of the most annoying faggots who walk the earth.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 00:32:52 2020 No.15277646 >>15277308 cringe Jude!

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 00:34:32 2020 No.15277655 File: 104 KB, 1080x1266, 1588651474848.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15277214 Suffering is based

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 00:35:54 2020 No.15277661 >>15277214 You cannot grow without pain and suffering. Antinatalism is just a childish whine of "Its not fair! I hate you and the whole world and I wish I had never been born! Waaah!"

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 00:52:56 2020 No.15277734 >>15277430 Why’s that?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 00:58:03 2020 No.15277771 >>15277430 Every person that I've met that fits the description of this meme has a bunch of dumb kids with their fat tattooed wife

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 01:01:08 2020 No.15277790 Personally I don't want to be the cause of potentially thousands of generations of hopeless idiots trapped in this hell world

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 01:05:34 2020 No.15277814 >>15277790 Based

Anonymous Tue May 5 01:09:45 2020 No.15277836
File: 510 KB, 1200x1530, jung2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15277256 >>15277661
Are u a complete fucking unhinged mental midget fatal retard? Maybe it can apply to your faggot first world ''suffering'' but not to real suffering.
Imagine being in poverty,mental illness ,constant misfortune,trauma ... etc completely overwhelmed by every possible ill fortune why would they slave off like this and not just suicide?you're kept in a rat maze, Its just sadomasochism to be alive in such situations. Having a serious mental illness is enough to fuck up your life, realistically without counting empty passing pleasure true moments of happiness are few and in total amount to few hours while the rest of life is mild discomfort to greater suffering.
And not to even begin on higher nonorganic entities feeding off human suffering as we feed on farms animals.

If you're only so fortunate to experience REAL thing beyond the dream so you have an actual refrence point to what is real compared to this shithole,which 99% of people do not experience. You will realize how bad this material reality is , its truly a nig*er reality in every sense.

Im not antinatalist just some of your views on suffering are retarded.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 01:11:27 2020 No.15277847 >>15277266 Based.

Anonymous Tue May 5 01:22:18 2020 No.15277908

>>15277836
I'm not either of them, but my father is destitute and suffers from psychotic episodes, my mother was abusive to all of us and then committed suicide, I've suffered from intense mental illness since middle school, and I've been screwed over, bullied, ostracized, mistreated, and generally excluded for much of my life.
Those guys are right.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 01:30:07 2020 No.15277948 >>15277836 And yet, despite all that, suffering still isn't bad.

Anonymous Tue May 5 01:32:28 2020 No.15277957
File: 1.49 MB, 1263x2000, maze2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15277908
and how many are rendered completely unstable and useless to themselves and society?
Most that are tired of coping just commit suicide or you just hope for some mystical awakening experience.

If you get stuck in the misfortune vortex its extremely rare for someone to come out of it, all efforts inner or outer will be sabotaged sooner or later and u will only be running in circles growing slightly more insane with each cycle.

Anonymous Tue May 5 01:45:11 2020 No.15277999

>>15277957
>and how many are rendered completely unstable and useless to themselves and society?
You are correct.
>Most that are tired of coping just commit suicide or you just hope for some mystical awakening experience.
You are correct. There have been times when I contemplated suicide every single day for months on end.
>If you get stuck in the misfortune vortex its extremely rare for someone to come out of it, all efforts inner or outer will be sabotaged sooner or later and u will only be running in circles growing slightly more insane with each cycle.
This is true of people like us - if you are what I think you are - who have experienced too much at once for too long. There is indeed a point at which a person is broken by their suffering, but
1. Suffering is generally experienced in bits and pieces, and not all at once. When experienced in this fashion, and in a social context where the individual has emotional support and an intellectual framework that allows them to make sense of and deal with their suffering, it can lead to growth.
You and I have neither, and so suffer much more than we might otherwise.
2. Regardless of our experiences, emotion cannot be substituted for rational argument. I don't think it's possible to build a rational argument for the idea that suffering is bad. Anti-natalists take it as an axiom, and I see no reason to accept it as an axiom, either.

Anonymous Tue May 5 01:45:37 2020 No.15278004

>>15277836
People like you make me wonder if you people wouldn't have been happier living as lesser apes still in trees eating ticks from each other's backs. Where without messy complicated philosophy and any self awareness you could take comfort in the simplicity of "Death Bad, tiger eating me bad, tree is good, banana good" All this tremendous human progress that has been born to us on the backs of hundreds of thousands of years of our ancestors suffering can just disappear and we can go back to when things were better.

Suffering is who we are. It's how we got here. It's where we are going. It's all we ever were, and all we will ever be.

Don't like it, go be a potato or a shrub.

Anonymous Tue May 5 01:47:40 2020 No.15278012
File: 155 KB, 700x566, al1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15277948
depends on the context, it terms of desirability it is bad and its complete imposed,false premise that suffering is needed for growth , this is the lowest paradigm. We could learn just as well with a different teacher than suffering but such is the current state of affairs.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 01:53:20 2020 No.15278030 >>15278004 Are you retarded? all life forms suffer , try a different approach and reread again

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 01:58:04 2020 No.15278047 >>15277957 nigga you just flawlessly summed up my entire fucking life

Anonymous Tue May 5 02:02:26 2020 No.15278067
File: 422 KB, 1281x1064, maze1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15277999
Im not antinatalist tho just saying suffering and this shit lowtier paradigm we are trapped in is a hellhole .

> intellectual framework that allows them to make sense of and deal with their suffering
You cant rationalize your way out of this it is impossible
There is no growth once you reach certain stage there is only self destruction , it is not so much the previous quality of suffering but rather a tiredness of existence and longing for the real, absolute reality . If you experience infinity nothing here can satisfy you .
You will find writers from 19th century who fall into depression after such experiences ,they expressed it well in writings.

Anonymous Tue May 5 02:05:53 2020 No.15278087
File: 79 KB, 602x602, 2613B0B7-6099-4525-9126-13AF80AEDB9B.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

> Owing to the universal inexperience of both kinds of pain, and the comparative rarity of the spectacle of a sufferer, an important consequence results: people now hate pain far more than earlier man did, and calumniate it worse than ever; indeed people nowadays can hardly endure the thought of pain, and make out of it an affair of conscience and a reproach to collective existence. The appearance of pessimistic philosophies is not at all the sign of great and dreadful miseries; for these interrogative marks regarding the worth of life appear in periods when the refinement and alleviation of existence already deem the unavoidable gnat-stings of the soul and body as altogether too bloody and wicked; and in the poverty of actual experiences of pain, would now like to make painful general ideas appear as suffering of the worst kind. - There might indeed be a remedy for pessimistic philosophies and the excessive sensibility which seems to me the real "distress of the present": but perhaps this remedy already sounds too cruel, and would itself be reckoned among the symptoms owing to which people at present conclude that "existence is something evil." Well! the remedy for "the distress" is distress.

Anonymous Tue May 5 02:07:24 2020 No.15278095
File: 330 KB, 1017x579, 1584932836105.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15278004
>Suffering is who we are. -- It's where we are going. It's all we ever were, and all we will ever be.
What bullshit. Suffering is there to guide the individual creature onto more adaptive and successful behaviors. It's a feedback system that ensures even the simplest of beings will do what it can to avoid situations and threats that will lower its chances of breeding and continuing its genetic legacy. It's a force at the very core of life itself. It's intrinsic to life, but it's in no way who we are, but very much the opposite. It's absolutely tied to what we are not "meant" to be. We suffer when we are in situations and states that are a threat to our being, to the continued existence of our genetic makeup.
>It's how we got here.
Yes, but there is no reason why we should seek to maintain this system of random mutations and chaotic escape from suffering, desperate grasping at pleasure. I'm not an anti-natalist by any means, since the only way to put an end to this system would be through progress towards something greater and better. Ending mankind would just leave the rest of the Earth to suffer. Ending the Earth would leave the rest of the universe's life to suffer. If there's potential to put an end to the nonsense, I don't see why we shouldn't strive for it.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 02:30:03 2020 No.15278175 >>15278004 Ever think about the billions of corpses that have fertilized civilization? Probably not, right? Your comfort doesn't compensate anyone for their suffering, there is no moral calculus in nature.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 02:31:40 2020 No.15278182 >>15277447 This is what you should have told Junko. Just stop feeling bad.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 02:36:41 2020 No.15278204 This thread sucks so much shit. I hate all of you and you're all retarded.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 02:38:14 2020 No.15278212 Antinatalists still haven't managed to debunk OP.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 02:41:00 2020 No.15278219 >>15278204 ur gay

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 02:44:09 2020 No.15278227 >>15278204 Can you elaborate on why you feel angered by stupidity?

Anonymous Tue May 5 02:56:14 2020 No.15278283
File: 1.93 MB, 400x300, 1570478923805.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Grow to die so your kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can die

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 02:58:59 2020 No.15278293 >>15278283 But pizza... and bacon...

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 03:00:50 2020 No.15278300 >>15278283 Yes. And?

Anonymous Tue May 5 03:06:12 2020 No.15278324
File: 933 KB, 500x379, 1572442851653.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15278300
And then grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die so his kid can grow to die

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 03:10:09 2020 No.15278340 >>15278087 based Freddy Neetch dabbing on pussy nu-males

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 03:13:10 2020 No.15278357 >>15277342 But you're just acknowledging that good things are good and bad things are bad. Otherwise you'd be justifying the bad things in themselves, rather than saying, don't worry, there are good things too.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 03:15:10 2020 No.15278367 >>15277308 No, avoiding the discomfort that growth entails is a cope. Growth and learning are the opposite of copes.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 03:16:14 2020 No.15278371 >>15278283 And this is bad why?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 03:35:37 2020 No.15278448 >>15278371 Lmao he can't tell you. Not a single antinatalist has ever managed to explain why suffering is bad.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 04:21:42 2020 No.15278579 >>15278324 based

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 05:18:37 2020 No.15278770 >>15277344 >purpose

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 05:19:39 2020 No.15278776 File: 14 KB, 255x247, 1588368791384.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15277214 >suffering isn't bad then take a mallet and smash your cock.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 05:41:45 2020 No.15278856 >>15278776 He never said it was good you dumb cunt.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 05:45:32 2020 No.15278874 >>15278856 then what is it?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 05:47:25 2020 No.15278882 >>15278874 Not bad.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 05:50:52 2020 No.15278897 >>15278882 so a kid getting raped by a pedophile is not bad?

Anonymous Tue May 5 05:51:57 2020 No.15278905

>>15278448
Okay, your 12 y.o. daughter is kidnapped by some maniac, and is being tortured for days, until she is finally able to die. What good does it make? What's the point of bringing her into the world in the first place? What in life could possibly justify this? You could say that this is just bad luck and not that common, but what do you think is worth risking such possibility? Read about soviet maniacs. Tell me all those kids just had to TAKE THE STOIC PILL, LOL. Also tell that to their parents.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 05:52:53 2020 No.15278908 >>15278897 The existence of good and bad are assumed axioms. Suffering being bad is another assumed axiom. If you disagree, you disagree. If you agree, you agree. You can build a valid worldview on either notion.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 05:54:43 2020 No.15278915 >>15278908 just answer the question man

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 05:56:14 2020 No.15278918 >>15278897 >a kid getting raped by a pedophile = suffering Do you know how to read? Are you trying to ask me if the suffering associated with that act is bad?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 05:58:40 2020 No.15278924 >>15278918 you said suffering is not bad. so then i asked you a simple question based on your logic.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 05:58:45 2020 No.15278925 >>15278905 What are you on about? Why does there have to be a "point"? Why does anything have to be "justified"? Suffering isn't bad, it's as simple as that.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 05:59:58 2020 No.15278930 >>15278924 Suffering is not bad. Innocent 12 year old girls getting raped is bad. These are logically consistent propositions.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:01:24 2020 No.15278938 >>15278930 if suffering isn't bad then why an innocent 12 year old girls getting raped is bad?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:01:34 2020 No.15278939 >>15278925 But what makes such suffering worthwhile? Stop with sophisms.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:04:00 2020 No.15278957 >>15278938 Because rape is a degenerate, depraved and evil act.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:05:54 2020 No.15278968 >>15278939 Why does it have to be worthwhile? You're the one assuming it has to be. Is life just one great big business transaction?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:10:34 2020 No.15278993 >>15278957 if not for suffering what does make rape degenerate, depraved and evil act?

Anonymous Tue May 5 06:12:50 2020 No.15279002

>>15278968
People have freedom of choice in terms of making kids, you know. When you make a kid you should consider whether it's worthwhile or not. If you are poor as fuck and living in Africa, it might be not the best idea to make kids. So yes, it HAS to be worthwhile. What's the worth in experiencing extreme suffering? Stop operating on ideas, and come down to actual plane of human existence. Of course suffering in itself is not fucking bad, nothing is bad in itself.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:13:23 2020 No.15279008 >>15278993 Many things, all ultimately irrelevant. If an innocent 12 year old girl got raped and it somehow resulted in no suffering, it'd still be bad.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:16:49 2020 No.15279024 >>15279008 >Many things, all ultimately irrelevant like what?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:18:29 2020 No.15279031 >>15279002 >So yes, it HAS to be worthwhile. Why? Again, you're just asserting this. What idea/material fact/supernatural force is guaranteeing the necessity of this? Is life just one big business transaction to you? The spreadsheets have to balance?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:19:49 2020 No.15279035 >>15279024 It deprives the potential of both the rapist and the victim.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:20:57 2020 No.15279041 I'm coming back to affirm that literally everyone but myself in this thread is completely fucking retarded.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:22:31 2020 No.15279045 >>15279035 why do you think it's bad? also are you implying that the suffering those 12 year old girls went through is not bad?

Anonymous Tue May 5 06:25:46 2020 No.15279053
File: 21 KB, 700x700, 89AC96C2-6864-443F-A225-C7DC22C62204.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15278993
It robs the victim of their agency in choosing what happens to their body, that’s all the justification you need to say rape is bad. It doesn’t matter how much or how little the victim suffered since as long as their right to choose has been violated then it’s still rape.
let me modify the scenario a little bit. Let’s say that before the rapist commits the assault he decides to hypnotize the girl. He has now made the girl believe that she wants and desires the assault, and she is also now mentally incapable of experiencing the physical pain of the rape. He then commits the assault and now they both walk away happier than before. If we judge this event solely based off of how much suffering was caused then we would have to say that him hypnotizing her is a moral good. However that’s a stupid conclusion. If we look at agency then we can say that even though the girl didn’t suffer from the rape since her agency was violated by the hypno rape (since the victim would obviously not want to be assaulted if she had retained her original mind) the we can say that rape is bad

Anonymous Tue May 5 06:27:26 2020 No.15279059

Again, a bunch of retards operating on ideas and exercising in sophism. Yet none can answer, why live such horrible lives many people experience, because they themselves by pure chance were born in 1st world countries, and have the opportunity to exercise in sophism, and their top struggle in life is to overcome anxiety from watching anime their whole life.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:27:36 2020 No.15279061 >>15277836 >Are u a complete fucking unhinged mental midget fatal retard? Maybe it can apply to your faggot first world ''suffering'' but not to real suffering. >Im not antinatalist just some of your views on suffering are retarded. very mean anon

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:29:14 2020 No.15279067 >>15279045 Again: >Suffering is not bad. >Innocent 12 year old girls getting raped is bad. Reducing potential is bad because potential is the condition of experience and the good.

Anonymous Tue May 5 06:30:17 2020 No.15279075

>>15279059
>why live such horrible lives many people experience, because they themselves by pure chance were born in 1st world countries, and have the opportunity to exercise in sophism, and their top struggle in life is to overcome anxiety from watching anime their whole life.
So? Why is this a bad thing?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:30:31 2020 No.15279076 >>15279067 are you implying that the suffering those 12 year old girls went through is not bad?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:31:53 2020 No.15279085 >>15279075 >LOOK MOM, I'VE READ PLATO ONE TIME! >WHY IS IT BAD, SOCRATES? >WELL YOU SEE...

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:33:02 2020 No.15279094 >>15279076 Anon, how many times do I have to repeat myself: suffering isn't bad. Innocent 12 year old girls getting raped is bad NOT because they suffered.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:35:02 2020 No.15279106 >>15279085 This is getting embarrassing. You accuse everyone of being sophists, but when your own assumptions are put under the magnifying glass your sperg out.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:36:06 2020 No.15279110 >>15279053 Good post.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:38:03 2020 No.15279119 >>15279094 >Innocent 12 year old girls getting raped is bad NOT because they suffered. so the suffering of raped girls is not bad?

Anonymous Tue May 5 06:38:42 2020 No.15279123

>>15279106
Because all you do is point the discussion to nowhere.
>DUHHHH HOW IS SUFFERING """IN ITSELF""" IS BAD?
>OKAY, BUT HOW IS IT """"BAD""""?
>BY """"BAD"""" I MEAN BAD IN ITSELF, CAN IT BE """"INHERENTLY""" BAD?
Just answer the question - why bring a kid into the world, where he can go out, and get his head chopped off? What can POSSIBLY outweigh the truly inherently not good and not bad nothingness? Why are you exercising in sophism?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:42:28 2020 No.15279140 >>15277395 Genuine smiles on that macro.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:44:48 2020 No.15279151 >>15277431 The anti faction isn't mad at all. It is learning a way around the thing parents suffered.

Anonymous Tue May 5 06:46:38 2020 No.15279161

>>15279123
You're the one that's leading the discussion to nowhere. You simply refuse to answer my questions.
>What can POSSIBLY outweigh the truly inherently not good and not bad nothingness?
Why does it have it outweigh anything? Why is this the means by which life is justified? Why does it matter if there's a chance that my hypothetical kid will suffer?
>Why are you exercising in sophism?
Just because they're problematizing your arguments, doesn't make them sophisms.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:46:59 2020 No.15279165 >>15279053 i agree with consent part but the suffering those 12 year old raped girls went through is not bad?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:47:41 2020 No.15279169 >>15279119 Correct, suffering isn't bad.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:49:29 2020 No.15279177 >>15279169 This is your brain on natalism.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:53:42 2020 No.15279193 >>15279177 Yes, most normal people think this way. We don't care that the rape of innocent 12 year girls resulted in X number of "negative qualia points"; rape is just bad, period.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:55:48 2020 No.15279199 >>15279193 I can confidently guarantee you that normal people think that the suffering induced by child rape is bad.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:57:53 2020 No.15279207 >>15279193 >most normal people think this way lmaooo, kill yourself fucking amerimutt boomer

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 06:59:52 2020 No.15279217 >>15279199 Normal people don't care if a child didn't suffer during rape. Rape is the bad, the suffering is irrelevant.

Anonymous Tue May 5 07:00:36 2020 No.15279220

>>15279165
> but the suffering those 12 year old raped girls went through is not bad?
Anon, the whole point of my post is that ultimately it doesn’t matter if the suffering was bad or not. Obviously hypnosis is far-fetched, but there are real methods that rapists use that technically reduce the suffering the victim experiences (for example date-rape drugs like roofies cause paralysis, numbness, and memory loss). Suffering is flawed since you can still do plenty of awful things while still not technically increasing the amount of suffering in the world. Drugs make people feel good, so if I become a drug dealer then i can reduce the suffering in the world by giving people something to forgot their pain. Hell if I give them an overdose on their first try then not only will they not have to experience withdrawal symptoms but they also get to die in euphoria. If their families end up missing them then I’ll just give the rest of them drugs until everyone is dead and happy. Nobody will have to suffer if they all just agree to just be pumped full of drugs until they die

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:09:34 2020 No.15279266 >>15279220 is life worth creating?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:14:01 2020 No.15279275 >>15279217 You've gone off the rails buddy. Anyone would tell you that the child being spared from experiencing it (say, being unconscious) would be a mercy.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:15:26 2020 No.15279277 >>15279177 >>15279199 >>15279207 >4chan incels think normies test a child's suffering levels after being raped to see if the rape was bad Lmao

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:16:13 2020 No.15279286 >>15279193 >>15279217 This viewpoint is far more inhuman than anything antinatalists have ever said.

Anonymous Tue May 5 07:16:50 2020 No.15279289

>>15279002
>When you make a kid you should consider whether it's worthwhile or not. If you are poor as fuck and living in Africa, it might be not the best idea to make kids. So yes, it HAS to be worthwhile
I think the birth rates alone are sufficient to disprove this idea.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:17:03 2020 No.15279290 >>15279275 Well, no shit; experiencing a bad thing (rape) is accordingly bad. Has nothing to do with suffering though.

Anonymous Tue May 5 07:18:30 2020 No.15279299

>>15279277
Let's use the hypnosis scenario that was proposed earlier. Say that a person is hypnotized into not perceiving their rape as bad. They experience no suffering, but it is still wrong as it is a violation of their personal agency. I agree with this. Now say they are not hypnotized, and they fully experience a brutal rape and are traumatized by it for years afterward. You are telling me that these situations are equal.
>>15279290
It's bad because it induces suffering.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:19:07 2020 No.15279303 >>15278087 What a chad.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:19:14 2020 No.15279304 >>15279286 It only seems inhuman to you because you never interact with humans. Ask a normie something like this >>15279053 and they'll say that rape is bad regardless of suffering.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:20:32 2020 No.15279307 >>15279304 I am not claiming that rape is bad because of suffering. It is morally wrong regardless of whether the person suffers. But the suffering that it can induce is bad.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:22:23 2020 No.15279315 >>15279277 you're missing the whole point, it all started with anon saying "suffering isn't bad" learn to follow whole conversation before making an assumption, faggot

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:25:15 2020 No.15279328 >>15279299 The hypnosis scenario was proposed by a different anon. But no, they're not equal, as one involves the experience of rape. Once again though, this has nothing to do with suffering.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:27:17 2020 No.15279335 >>15279328 >this has nothing to do with suffering. have you ever got sexually assaulted?

Anonymous Tue May 5 07:28:20 2020 No.15279337

>>15279266
I’d say so, but if you disagree than more power to you. If you think that life isn’t worth creating than by all means keep not having children. I can see pros and cons to raising a child, but ultimately I have a great fondness for children and wish to have my own some day

Anonymous Tue May 5 07:29:18 2020 No.15279340

>>15279328
>>15279328
Why do you play along with their game? Why don't you introduce something more complex into the mix, like the death of a parent, or the suffering experienced by the families of dead members of the SS, or by the deposed leaders of the Nazi Party? Why do you let sophists control the discussion?

Anonymous Tue May 5 07:30:05 2020 No.15279343

>>15279328
>The hypnosis scenario was proposed by a different anon.
I'm simply using it as an example.
>But no, they're not equal, as one involves the experience of rape. Once again though, this has nothing to do with suffering.
You are claiming that they are not equal because one involves experience. Why would that matter unless the experience induces suffering? Say the person was hypnotized such that they would be conscious that they were being raped and having their agency violated, but they would experience no suffering from it (physical pain, mental trauma). You cannot reasonably distinguish these situations without suffering.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:30:33 2020 No.15279345 >>15279307 >But the suffering that it can induce is bad. Suffering isn't bad. Experience of bad things is bad. I don't care if a bad experience doesn't involve suffering; it's still bad.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:32:20 2020 No.15279352 >>15279343 Why would that matter unless the experience induces suffering? See this >>15279345

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:33:11 2020 No.15279354 >>15279345 >Experience of bad things is bad why

Anonymous Tue May 5 07:33:17 2020 No.15279355

>>15279352
That answers nothing. Why is experiencing a bad thing bad?
Why would [being the subject of an immoral act without experiencing it] be meaningful different than [being the subject of an immoral act that you experience] unless you suffer during the experience?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:35:06 2020 No.15279370 >>15279337 with an open mind i wanna know why life is worth creating?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:36:09 2020 No.15279377 >>15279370 Because thinking otherwise makes me upset and my dick gets hard so I need to do it.

Anonymous Tue May 5 07:36:50 2020 No.15279381

Reposting here.

1. Pain is a physiological state that does not necessarily have any moral valence.
2. The fact that some people experience pain at the hands of others does not necessarily have any moral valence.
3. The fact that something hurts does not necessarily mean that that thing has any moral valence.
4. Directly causing pain to others by, for instance, dropping a bomb on their heads is not necessarily immoral.
5. Indirectly causing pain to others by, for instance, delivering an order to drop a bomb on someone's head is not necessarily immoral.
6. The fact that suffering exists and is unavoidable does not necessarily mean that life itself is not worth living.
7. The fact that suffering exists and is unavoidable does not necessarily mean that either life or the creation of life are immoral.
...and so on and so forth. You have given us no reason to accept this axiom. Indeed, life itself cannot function if we accept this axiom, because we must cause suffering and death to all manner of creatures, man, beast, and plant, in order to sustain our existence. Furthermore, we exist in competing social units, now organized on the level of states, that must from time to time cause great harm to those within and without our borders to sustain ourselves. The ultimate logical conclusion that can be drawn from this axiom is, at best, the destruction of the human race, and, at worst, the destruction of all life. It is infantile, sophomoric, and moronic.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:38:23 2020 No.15279390 >>15279355 Because the act itself is bad. See >>15279035 and >>15279053

Anonymous Tue May 5 07:38:55 2020 No.15279395

>>15279381
You're very close to the realization that nothing has any moral valence at all.
>The ultimate logical conclusion that can be drawn from this axiom is, at best, the destruction of the human race, and, at worst, the destruction of all life.
And? The existence or nonexistence of life has no moral valence.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:39:43 2020 No.15279398 Daily reminder that this thread is a debate between Jews and Whites, and you know which side either of these people are on

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:40:24 2020 No.15279403 >>15279390 Why would the act being bad mean that experiencing it is bad?

Anonymous Tue May 5 07:40:58 2020 No.15279405
File: 244 KB, 1846x1212, 1467133154865.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15277279
>making as many people as possible
That does not follow at all you colossal homosexual.
The solution of the equation of pleasure-displeasure would have to be self-consistent consistent at every new birth, with varying coefficients from such births.
You could perfectly well have a maximum point of general net pleasure at a specific number of people alive.
Not that the idea of a having a significant metric space structure to 'pleasure' isn't retarded in the first place, but your post shows that, as all empirioniggers, you have never studied differential equations.

Anonymous Tue May 5 07:42:21 2020 No.15279413

>>15279395
>You're very close to the realization that nothing has any moral valence at all.
I haven't made that statement because I am not sure whether or not it's true. It's true that it isn't possible to prove otherwise using the tools of reason, but that's got little to do with our present purpose.
>And? The existence or nonexistence of life has no moral valence.
Irrelevant. I never asserted that it does. The point is that anti-natalists have an enormous number of problems in their argument that they've never bothered to deal with, and are indeed incapable of dealing with.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:43:23 2020 No.15279421 >>15279405 >>15277279 What in God's name is this Benthamite garbage

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:43:29 2020 No.15279424 >>15277214 You must be at least 18 years or older to post on this board.

Anonymous Tue May 5 07:44:24 2020 No.15279429

>>15279413
>Irrelevant. I never asserted that it does. The point is that anti-natalists have an enormous number of problems in their argument that they've never bothered to deal with, and are indeed incapable of dealing with.
If part of your refutation is simply the fact that it could entail the cessation of life, you are assuming that life has some sort of moral value. It's implied in your argument.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:45:22 2020 No.15279439 >>15279421 My post is anti-benthamite, just also pointed out his mathematical illiteracy to utilitarianist anon.

Anonymous Tue May 5 07:47:02 2020 No.15279450

>>15278095

“When some men fail to accomplish what they desire to do they exclaim angrily, “May the whole world perish!” This repulsive emotion is the pinnacle of envy, whose implication is “If I cannot have something, no one can have anything, no one is to be anything!”

― Friedrich Nietzsche

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:48:46 2020 No.15279461 >>15279450 And so what? If those men have the power to destroy the world, then they'll destroy the world. If they don't, it's just a whine.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:50:37 2020 No.15279472 >>15278087 TLDR emo-fags need to be severely beaten

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:50:51 2020 No.15279474 >>15279403 For the same reason that a rapist experiencing rape is bad. Suffering is irrelevant.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:51:11 2020 No.15279478 File: 62 KB, 660x313, Jordan Peterson is evil and stupid.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15277214 >suffering isn't bad Cope: The Post

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 07:51:42 2020 No.15279484 >>15279450 said the basement dwelling faggot who went mad while trying to refute Schopenhauer

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:00:15 2020 No.15279526

>>15279217
What is worse: shot in the head, or slow killing with a knife, cutting off your fingers, skinning you, pulling your teeth, you can imagine? Both actions actions result in killing a person. So killing is bad. Nobody would care about suffering? Chose your answer carefully.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:02:04 2020 No.15279536 >Suffering isn't bad Just making this statement on its own is silly and the argument in this thread shows it. At least Christians try to make a point for suffering having a redemptive nature or being part of a greater good.

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:02:37 2020 No.15279541

>>15279429
>If part of your refutation is simply the fact that it could entail the cessation of life, you are assuming that life has some sort of moral value. It's implied in your argument.
No, lol. My argument is contained in the seven points above that. I was simply pointing out the logical conclusion of anti-natalism: the destruction of all life. I don't think anyone except the intellectual Lilliputian could possibly be swayed by such a doctrine. The point is to force you to face that fact so that you can grow beyond
>>15279439
Oh, okay, good work then.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:04:10 2020 No.15279547 >>15277425 >not an argument absolute retard

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:04:29 2020 No.15279550 >>15279526 >Would care about You have no idea how to conduct a rational discussion, do you? >>15279536 The statement requires a "necessarily," I agree. Other than that, the point is that if you refuse to accept that axiom, anti-natalism falls apart.

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:06:29 2020 No.15279563

>>15279550
>Normal people don't care if a child didn't suffer during rape. Rape is the bad, the suffering is irrelevant.
I am asking again. A child is getting shot in the head, or tortured to death. The outcome is the same - child is dead, killed. Killing is bad. Is suffering not relevant and can be omitted?

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:08:05 2020 No.15279568

>>15279370
To be very honest anon, I can’t really put into words why I believe in what I believe in. I quite simply believe that Life is good, and that having kids when you’re ready for them is good because of that. I wish I could give a more satisfying answer, but something I have come to understand is that ultimately you have to figure out the big questions yourself. It’s a marathon my friend, but there is not shame in dropping out or moving at your own pace

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:10:04 2020 No.15279577 >>15279568 I can tell it for you -- you have been fortunate enough to have a good life, and mostly lived with comfort. You have no idea what life can be.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:10:45 2020 No.15279585 Suffering is bad by definition. It an experience isn't bad, it isn't suffering. Imagine not being able to understand this.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:13:16 2020 No.15279598 >>15279585 They are too busy exercising in abstract logic and sophism. They are beyond the plane of actual human existence.

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:14:01 2020 No.15279603

>>15278357
The point you're missing is that experiences aren't monads, it's impossible to have a good experience without suffering, it's part of the equation.

>>15277395
>Nazis
>European
Literally destroyed most of Europe and killed tens of millions of her best and brightest in the peak of life while making nationalism a fringe taboo belief. Go away, retard.

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:15:25 2020 No.15279617

>>15279563
You're confusing me with the other anon, and I can see why, considering that we both use reason rather than emotion. My position is not the same as his, by the way. I take a position of complete moral skepticism, while he seems to believe in some a priori moral system.
In any case, see >>15279340
The point is that suffering is not inherently bad. One must take into account all related factors before concluding that any instance of suffering is "good" or "bad." I doubt even a sophist such as yourself would argue that suffering inflicted on another during an act of self-defense, even one ending in the painful death of the assailant, would be "bad."

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:15:42 2020 No.15279620 >>15279585 You are just equating 'bad' and 'suffering'. Of course you then have no issue forcing the point of suffering=bad.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:17:06 2020 No.15279629 File: 121 KB, 640x788, walter-kaufmann-390525.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >itt, seething slave morality apologists

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:17:36 2020 No.15279634

>>15279585
>Suffering is bad by definition.
No.
>It an experience isn't bad, it isn't suffering.
Again, no.
You want to define the terms we use such that your argument cannot be falsified. This is a form of cheating that nobody has any obligation to accept.

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:18:05 2020 No.15279636

>>15279617
>The point is that suffering is not inherently bad.
No, suffering is bad by definition.
>>15279620
No, *I* am not equating anything. It's an analytic a priori. Suffering is bad, squares have four sides, all bodies are extended.
Deniers of this are coping brainlets.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:18:50 2020 No.15279640 >>15279636 >No, suffering is bad by definition. See >>15279634 >It's an analytic a priori. lmao

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:18:57 2020 No.15279641 >>15279629 Nietzsche was technically an antinatalist

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:20:08 2020 No.15279647

>>15279634
>>15279640
If an experience isn't suffering, it isn't bad. You can be in an experience where you are sad or there is pain, but if you "grow" from it or overall "learn from the experience", then it isn't actually a bad experience and therefore isn't suffering.
By DEFINITION, suffering is bad, like by DEFINITION, rectangles have four sides.
Denying this is just being a coping brainlet, with no argument.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:20:11 2020 No.15279648 >>15279585 >suffer through hard work and studying >complete great art >immense satisfaction Is this bad? You had to suffer for it, it wasn't easy, most people couldn't have endured it. Is this bad?You're an idiot.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:21:21 2020 No.15279653 >>15279641 >reads one out of context Nietzsche quote which is just him quoting Sophocles quoting another and thinks he knows what Nietzsche thought you're dilettantism is showing

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:22:23 2020 No.15279658 >>15279478 holy shit we're reaching levels of mediocrity that shouldn't be possible

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:23:27 2020 No.15279663

>>15279585
Suffering is a transient unpleasant sensation, a hallucination. People who cling to suffering as meaningful are only afraid of beginning their journey through nihilism.

Though perhaps I wouldn't go so far as to say "suffering isn't bad", I would say it isn't real since it is purely a mind event, and you're a proper modern, a materialist, aren't you?

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:23:35 2020 No.15279665

>>15279568
I remember reading a story about a child molester in Belgium . He abducted two eight-year old girls and kept them in a hidden dungeon in his basement where he raped them over and over. He was eventually arrested but the girls were not found; as such they starved to death in their underground cell. How do you integrate things such as this into your theory of the goodness of life?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:23:39 2020 No.15279666 >>15279658 >>15279478 This is Nietzsche's Last Men incarnate, it's amazing how right he was about everything.

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:24:08 2020 No.15279669

>>15279617
>inherently
Again, resorting to useless sophism.
Can you please tell me what is inherently bad in itself? Nothing is fucking inherently bad. Things are bad only in relation to how they are manifested in our existence. Stop with this faggotry. None of you can answer, what makes life worth living. And you can't answer it. But there are sure tons of examples why it isn't. And not a single "argument" of yours is worth anything to people who actually suffered hard as fuck. But you know nothing of suffering. You know only circlejerking, and enjoying the luck of being born in comfort.

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:24:36 2020 No.15279673

>>15279647
>If an experience isn't suffering, it isn't bad.
Okay mate, just keep repeating that, I'm sure it'll become true eventually.
>You can be in an experience where you are sad or there is pain, but if you "grow" from it or overall "learn from the experience", then it isn't actually a bad experience and therefore isn't suffering.
I see absolutely no reason to accept this claim.
>By DEFINITION, suffering is bad, like by DEFINITION, rectangles have four sides.
What on Earth makes you think that your attempt to attach moral valence to suffering is the same as geometry? Are you okay?

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:24:51 2020 No.15279675

>>15279636
I'm not surprised that kantian retard can't into logic. Yours is not a statement of formal ontology, or not 'analytic a priori' if you want. It is also false.
Squares are dined in such a way that you can reach the proposition that they have four squares by formal means. You don't do this with suffering and bad unless defining the word 'suffering' as bad, as you do.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:25:51 2020 No.15279679 >>15279663 Qualia are objectively real and compatible with materialist ontologies, and in fact have been steel-manned by a litany of research on the topic.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:26:08 2020 No.15279681 File: 27 KB, 489x499, 469.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15279653 Neet never procreated

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:26:53 2020 No.15279685 >>15279673 Still no argument >>15279675 Still no argument The absolute state, really pathetic and low IQ

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:26:56 2020 No.15279687 >>15279681 he liked to fuck Italian whores how do you think he got syphillis?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:27:49 2020 No.15279690 >>15279669 Why does life have to be worth living? Can't it just be?

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:28:05 2020 No.15279691

>>15279669
>Can you please tell me what is inherently bad in itself? Nothing is fucking inherently bad.
I'm not sure if that is true, but that position makes more sense than what you've been saying.
>Things are bad only in relation to how they are manifested in our existence.
What is this supposed to mean?
>None of you can answer, what makes life worth living. And you can't answer it.
We don't have to. We reject the premise of the question itself.
>And not a single "argument" of yours is worth anything to people who actually suffered hard as fuck.
Why do you assume that nobody but yourself has suffered?
>But you know nothing of suffering. You know only circlejerking, and enjoying the luck of being born in comfort.
Not true, and not an argument.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:29:20 2020 No.15279697 File: 1.61 MB, 1293x1293, 1538114803325.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15279629 ANTI NATALISTS COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY BTFO

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:29:47 2020 No.15279701 >>15279687 antinatalism isn't against fucking or marriage. it argue against procreation. and neet never procreated or hell even got married.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:30:04 2020 No.15279702 Antinatalism is false because suffering isn't bad. It's as simple as that.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:32:34 2020 No.15279714 >>15279690 >Can't it just be? Why, if we are in position to cease its being? >>15279702 What is bad?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:35:19 2020 No.15279723 >>15279702 see >>15279585

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:35:50 2020 No.15279727 >>15279701 Nietzsche tried multiple times to marry, he wanted a family. Care to move the goal posts again? Maybe once you go off that cliff you'll stop embarrassing yourself.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:36:35 2020 No.15279733 >>15279629 >kaufnann

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:40:54 2020 No.15279754

>>15279727
>Nietzsche tried multiple times to marry, he wanted a family.
damn this sounds awful. he lived a fucking miserable neet isolated life and went while trying to refute Schopenhauer. this is a proof that "life is an unprofitable episode disturbing the blessed calm of non-existence."

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:43:03 2020 No.15279766

>>15279733
>never read Nietzsche
>never read anything really
>still want to feel smart
>decide to be a retard on the internet
>don't actually know any arguments because you don't know anything
>post retarded shit about the names of people you've never read instead

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:44:41 2020 No.15279773 >>15279714 >What is bad? Don't know. It's not suffering though, so it'd be pretty stupid to end humanity over it.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:45:27 2020 No.15279780 >>15279773 See >>15279585

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:45:56 2020 No.15279784 >>15279723 See >>15279702

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:46:26 2020 No.15279788 >>15279766 why so mad that your jew idol worshipper is exposed ?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:46:35 2020 No.15279789 >>15279766 cope harder sweaty neet never procreated. so technically he was an antinatalist.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:47:10 2020 No.15279795 >>15279773 What do you mean you don't know? You are stating that suffering is not bad. What is not bad then? It should be opposite to bad, right? Define "not bad".

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:47:57 2020 No.15279797 >>15279780 Well I reject that defintion. There are many ways in which suffering is good, and many bad things that don't involve suffering.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:49:14 2020 No.15279801 >>15279795 Not bad isn't the same as good

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:50:25 2020 No.15279805 >>15279797 yeah antinatalists accept that all suffering is not bad. like removing bad tooth, you have to bear little suffering in order to avoid greater suffering in the future.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:50:31 2020 No.15279806 >>15279714 >Why, if we are in position to cease its being? But we're also in a position to perpetuate its being? Why choose one over the other?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:50:31 2020 No.15279807 >>15279795 >contradictory is the same as opposite Ho no no no no! Antinatalist bros, we got too cocky!

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:53:21 2020 No.15279817

>>15279801
Okay, so you don't know what is bad. Not bad is not the same as good, but it is not bad either. I assume you don't know what good is either. So how are you supposed to make any point whatsoever, if you have no idea what terms you are operating? You are just shitposting at this point. Unless you define what is good and bad and how not bad relates to good and bad, and what qualities differentiate it from each other, your posts are nothing but mere shitposting and cope with inability to refute antinatalism and pessimism.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:54:08 2020 No.15279823 >>15279805 Don't know what you're trying to say here

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:55:24 2020 No.15279828

The real refutation of antinatalism is only 3 letters
KYS
The antinatalist, for all his talk about how life is suffering, chooses to continue living, his hypocrisy so apparent to anyone with a functional brain that it's laughable anyone considers it a philosophical position in the first place
If an antinatalist still breathes, then clearly they don't actually believe in their claims

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:56:06 2020 No.15279831 File: 292 KB, 583x835, 5CDA490A-7A66-4187-AADC-92684FC18E8C.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15279823 read the book subhuman

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:56:10 2020 No.15279832 File: 15 KB, 300x300, 854big.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15279828

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:56:14 2020 No.15279833 >>15279817 >how are you supposed to make any point whatsoever Via negativa. This is basic stuff

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:56:52 2020 No.15279835 >>15279797 See >>15279647 >>15279805 I am not even an antinatalist

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:57:01 2020 No.15279836 >>15279832 Use words

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:57:24 2020 No.15279839 >>15279831 I've read this. I don't buy it becuase he presupposes that suffering is bad.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:58:58 2020 No.15279846 >>15279839 Suffering is bad by definition like how a rectangle has four sides by definition. There is no presupposition.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:59:06 2020 No.15279848 >>15279833 You are stating that suffering is not bad. Define: >good >bad >not bad >not good Define their qualities, and how they relate to each other.

Anonymous Tue May 5 08:59:17 2020 No.15279849
File: 200 KB, 400x534, 1588073904201.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

There is no refuting antinatalism. Here's a short summary:
>"HAHA THEN KILL YOURSEL-"
If you weren't born you wouldn't have to drive a knife onto your own throat just to escape this life, you wouldn't have to risk offending some deity that will throw you into hell if it exists for doing so, and you wouldn't need to hear clowns with no empathy telling you to kill yourself as if this somehow is mean to show how life is worth living, or how this makes for a good word to have children in. None of this refutes anti-natalism, and perhaps just strengthens it. Watch the absolute amount of scurrying, ad hominem and goal post moving to deflect this.
>Well but some people are happy.
Yes, some people live average lives. Perhaps a lot of people, even those who suffer, manage to gather enough coping mechanisms to balance it out before a reasonably merciful death (AKA dying swiftly, usually around your 50s to 60s).
But since you were put into this world without anyone asking you, and you don't know if you'll be one of those, making this bet with some other person without having a very good justification is immoral.
>Well I have a very good reason to have children.
Saving your marriage is not a good reason. Needing hands to work on your farm is not a good reason. None of these things should fall on the shoulders of your progeny. Wanting to perpetuate your family or your ego by keeping your last name alive is also not their responsibility. They might want to bear all of these things, but the fact is they are not mandated to bear them. You are making these choices for them. You know how much people rage about circumcision because it happens before the child can consent to it? That is nothing close to the amount of suffering a person goes through in a lifetime, yet this doesn't stop people from birthing others, even when they are wholly unprepared to raise a child.

I don't really need to look at the replies to this post to know the kind of dishonest shit that will ensue because I've seen this a million times. Just have your fucking kids, hope you pass away peacefully and etc like everyone else and try to rationalize your egoist needs to put more people in this planet despite being part of the only species smart enough to choose not to do so.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 08:59:44 2020 No.15279851 >>15279835 Okay so you're just conflating suffering with the bad. That's fine, but can you show me one case of suffering/the bad that fits your defintion it?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 09:00:15 2020 No.15279852 >>15279629 This resounds platonism, christianity a lot. Why did Nietzsche not realize this?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 09:00:56 2020 No.15279855 >>15279846 Give me a defintion of The Bad then. You will have philosophy if you can do this

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 09:02:09 2020 No.15279859 >>15279848 I don't have to. Do you not know how apophatic theology works?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 09:03:12 2020 No.15279866 >>15279855 Solved philosophy*

Anonymous Tue May 5 09:03:14 2020 No.15279867

>>15279851
>>15279855
There is no conflation, it is by definition.
Just like one does not need to show a specific rectangle to understand all rectangles have four sides, one does not need any specific case of suffering to show suffering is bad.
They are analytic a priori, NOT synthetic a priori.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 09:04:19 2020 No.15279871 >>15279859 Oh, so shitposting and mental masturbation. Got it.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 09:06:39 2020 No.15279881 >>15279679 Tell that to Dennett

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 09:06:56 2020 No.15279884 >>15279867 Give me the proof then. Rectangle = 4 sides, The Bad = ?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 09:07:16 2020 No.15279887 The ''suffering is inherently/by definition bad'' posts teem with sentimentality. It is not even worth discussing. This is all they can do (read cope) to indulge in their own misery, this is comfortable to them.

Anonymous Tue May 5 09:07:20 2020 No.15279888

>>15279849
Children are the property of their parents until they reach legal adulthood, of course they don't get to make their own decision
Also no, you whining about how it lacks empathy to say KYS to an antinatalist doesn't refute it
If you really claim that all there is is suffering and the world is not worth being born into, then the answer is simply to end your life. You can't refute that, and the real reason why you don't is because your claim is false and you'd rather live than not exist. Don't try giving me some "Oh, the pain!" shit either, there are painless ways to end it all if you really want to.
You're just larping on the internet for (You)s

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 09:12:47 2020 No.15279916 >>15279849 there are countless methods to kys in a painless way, but do you think that setting yourself on fire would surpass all suffering with which you would be charged living more 40, 50, 60 years?

Anonymous Tue May 5 09:16:21 2020 No.15279930

>>15279836
He posted a picture of Philipp Mainlander.
>In his central work Die Philosophie der Erlösung (The Philosophy of Redemption or The Philosophy of Salvation) — according to Theodor Lessing, "perhaps the most radical system of pessimism known to philosophical literature" —] Mainländer proclaims that life is absolutely worthless, and that "the will, ignited by the knowledge that non-being is better than being, is the supreme principle of morality."
>...on the night on April 1, 1876, Mainländer hanged himself in his residence in Offenbach, using a pile of copies of The Philosophy of Redemption (which had arrived the previous day from his publisher) as a platform. He was thirty-four years old.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 09:18:25 2020 No.15279940 File: 1 KB, 263x192, download.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15279867 >>15279884 I'm waiting, anon. Give me an analytic a priori proof of The Bad. An example would be nice as well.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 09:21:38 2020 No.15279948 >>15279940 they can't because they can't think, they can't use reason. all they say is pure sentimentalism

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 09:26:12 2020 No.15279975 >>15279888 The fear is what makes them still living

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 09:33:53 2020 No.15280027 >>15279948 The silence is deafening.

Anonymous Tue May 5 09:43:29 2020 No.15280089
File: 120 KB, 900x551, 1587006062038.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>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

Anonymous Tue May 5 09:52:52 2020 No.15280151
File: 1.16 MB, 1919x2404, 1588240478749.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Good and Bad is an abstract concept and I decide which it is.
Suffering needs a context to be good or bad.
>Pulling a tooth is suffering, but if the tooth is bad and not pulled there will be more suffering.
>I think having bad teeth is bad
>Therfore therefore suffering the tooth pulling is good and suffering the long term effects of bad tooth is bad

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 09:57:36 2020 No.15280180 File: 207 KB, 643x493, 1535546469772.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15280151 read the book subhuman >>15279831

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 10:01:11 2020 No.15280197 >>15280180 Kys nerd I read whatever I want

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 10:01:28 2020 No.15280202 >>15279478 Was this written by a bot? Something about it feels mechanical.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 10:11:12 2020 No.15280268 >>15280197 then you have no right to comment on this philosophical argument if you haven't even read the book.

Smegmy the Clown Tue May 5 10:20:07 2020 No.15280324
File: 76 KB, 402x780, Mirrored+box+art_460a53_6307660.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15279647
You are getting flustered over these denials of your base presuppositions, and that won't get us anywhere. First of all, a rhombus is a shape with four sides (an oversimplification, of course). However, "suffering" means any negative sensation, while "bad" means something that ought to be avoided. They are not the same thing. I suffer when I life weights, and that is bad. However, I do not avoid it. Similarly, if I were to sedate a woman and grope her, I would believe that to be a bad thing, but she wouldn't suffer, so it would be permissible according to your belief.

>if an experience isn't suffering, it isn't bad
And what does something being bad mean? Don't give me a circular answer (that it is suffering). Because then, all you are saying is that "Suffering is suffering." Tell me, if an experience is suffering, and suffering equals bad, then what does bad mean? What does it mean we ought to do?

>>15279669
>And not a single "argument" of yours is worth anything to people who actually suffered hard as fuck. But you know nothing of suffering. You know only circlejerking, and enjoying the luck of being born in comfort.
> Stop with this faggotry
This is actual sophism here

> what makes life worth living.
This is subjective. You wouldn't get what makes my life worth living. Either way, you don't need a reason to live in order to live. Life doesn't need to be "worth it." Not everything you do needs to be "worth it." You're a living example of that (supposing you don't have a reason for life being worth living).

>Nothing is fucking inherently bad.
Like suffering?

>Things are bad only in relation to how they are manifested in our existence
No shit. If they manifested themselves in another existence we wouldn't be having this discussion

>>15279714
>What is bad?
Nothing is bad. Suffering isn't bad, therefore life isn't bad, even though there is more to life than suffering and not all suffering is bad, as suffering =/= bad.

>Why, if we are in a position to cease its being
Why should we cease its being? Is that even feasible? Isn't life just going to arise anew, unless it already exists out there in the universe?

>>15279754
Non-existence isn't a calm because you don't exist. If it's so calming, just go there already and stop wasting your time trying to futilely refute us when you could, say, be getting your shit together to improve your supposedly miserable life.

>>15279789
WTF, rocks are also anti-natalists?

>>15279795
Suffering is not inherently bad. Then what is? I don't have to answer that question, as it's an entirely different discussion. However, the point that "suffering isn't bad" still stands. This doesn't mean suffering is good, it just means it is not a bad thing inherently because some suffering can be a good thing. To deny that and say "but that's not real suffering because it's not bad" can't be done unless you define what bad is.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 10:24:58 2020 No.15280348 File: 1.79 MB, 355x343, 1588230711535.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15280268 >Implying anyone other that you read it Must suck being a nerd like you

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 10:37:41 2020 No.15280435 File: 630 KB, 1058x1323, 1588686054591.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Suffering is not inherently bad and pleasure is not inherently good. Nothing is inherently good or bad, it's all subjective. You cannot refute this.

Smegmy the Clown Tue May 5 10:38:04 2020 No.15280437
File: 17 KB, 500x508, 1588261852073.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15279817
> Not bad is not the same as good, but it is not bad either.
Yes. Just because suffering is not bad doesn't mean it is good. Rather, there is good suffering and there is bad suffering, and suffering is not something bad in itself. In my definition, "bad" means something that should be avoided.

>>15279849
>f you weren't born you wouldn't have to drive a knife onto your own throat just to escape this life
If you weren't born you wouldn't exist so there is no "better" alternate state to this existence (unless you believe in an afterlife). Besides, there are painful ways of killing yourself. Perhaps seek Euthanasia. You were "brainwashed" by life into thinking reproduction mattered, and you managed to free yourself of that delusion. Why are you stopping now, when you can free yourself of the final delusion- that your life matters? Because it's too hard, huh? Not good enough.

>you wouldn't have to risk offending some deity that will throw you into hell if it exists for doing so
Depends on the deity and what pre-existence is like, if it even exists in that religious belief. Furthermore, the deity could just tell you that you should reproduce, or else you'll go to hell.

>wouldn't need to hear clowns with no empathy telling you to kill yourself as if this somehow is mean to show how life is worth living
If you offed yourself you wouldn't need to hear them anymore. And we're not trying to show you that life is worth living, we're trying to highlight what we think are the conclusions of anti-natalism and its father, pessimism.

>But since you were put into this world without anyone asking you
There is no entity to ask if it wants to be put in the world. Furthermore, that entity has no experiences or personality to influence it in the direction of wanting to be born or the direction of not wanting to be born.

>making this bet with some other person without having a very good justification is immoral
How do you justify your morality? Moralities tend to hinge on the assumption that one's life has value, that life is worth living, and that society is worth preserving. These don't seem to be pessimistic beliefs.

>they are not mandated to bear them
Am I mandated to bear my own sufferings? If yes, then why not kill myself to escape these sufferings?

> You know how much people rage about circumcision because it happens before the child can consent to it?
That's because the child exists

Nice fog-brained, uninspired copypasta.

>hope you pass away peacefully and etc like everyone else
Wow, anti-natalists are so humane and virtuous, unlike those evil natalists!

> and try to rationalize your egoist needs to put more people in this planet
What's wrong with this? Implying that there exists a wrong and right.

>being part of the only species smart enough to choose not to do so
Don't make fun of the less intelligent. They've gone through enough in their horrible, short lives for you to look down on them.

Anonymous Tue May 5 10:39:38 2020 No.15280449

>>15280324
>just go there already and stop wasting your time trying to futilely refute us when you could
i enjoy witnessing the shitshow created by selfish braindead faggots like you. have fun watching your kids suffer all the the incoming economic, political, energy and climate catastrophes.

>WTF, rocks are also anti-natalists?
rocks lack the ability to procreate retard

Smegmy the Clown Tue May 5 10:41:26 2020 No.15280461

>>15279975
So what? Anti-natalists were presumably once afraid of not leaving a genetic legacy or being called a childless failure by society. They managed to overcome that fear. Now, overcoming the fear of death is the next, waiting hurdle. You wanna unplug yourself from the Matrix, don't you anon? Can't stay brainwashed by DNA forever!

>also, implying that fear is the only reason we have for living

>>15280180
I don't have to read it. One doesn't argue with thumbnails of book covers. One argues with words

Anonymous Tue May 5 10:41:50 2020 No.15280463

>>15279884
>>15279940
The bad = suffering, just like the rectangle = four sides. Whether or not you posted that image doesn't have anything to do with a rectangle having four sides.
A rectangle has four sides regardless of whether or not you can show an example of a rectangle.
>>15279948
>>15280027
Oh wow, a guy goes to eat breakfast and it means that he "can't argue"
You really are low IQ, aren't you

Anonymous Tue May 5 10:42:17 2020 No.15280471

>>15277266
This. The very fact that any happy people exist proves antinatalists wrong.
>>15277278
This is true on every level. Suffering is almsot always good for the individual (biologically and psychologically), society, and nature. Look at forests after wildfires.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 10:42:52 2020 No.15280473 >>15279887 No argument, more low IQ cope

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 10:43:11 2020 No.15280475 File: 1.58 MB, 960x960, 1588682530975.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Threads like this make me feel like most people on this board have a "Fuck everyone but me" viewpoint.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 10:44:06 2020 No.15280483 >>15280324 I'm not flustered, I"m simply pointing out that it is invalid to deny the analytic a priori from the fact that it is an analytic a priori. Suffering is to be avoided by definition. If something is not to be avoided, then it isnt suffering.

Smegmy the Clown Tue May 5 10:44:23 2020 No.15280486
File: 445 KB, 1146x966, 1588180203893.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15280449
>rocks lack the ability to procreate retard
It was a joke

>i enjoy witnessing the shitshow created by selfish braindead faggots like you
Rent free

>have fun watching your kids suffer all the the incoming economic, political, energy and climate catastrophes.
I won't care about that. I am having fun watching people like you get mad and devolve into pejorative-slinging. It's almost like anti-natalism is just thinly-veiled ressentiment and victimhood

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 10:47:01 2020 No.15280500 >>15277214 If it's not bad it's not suffering. Also neanderthals had 300 IQ and were peaceful antinatalists. That is why they are gone.

Anonymous Tue May 5 10:47:46 2020 No.15280508

I can't believe how low IQ the people are here.
I'm not even an anti natalist. I'm simply pointing out the objective reality that suffering is bad and to be avoided by definition. It is an analytic a priori.
There still is no argument against this. Very sad that such low IQ posts are shitting up the thread.

Smegmy the Clown Tue May 5 10:49:58 2020 No.15280529

>>15280463
First of all, a rectangle is not equal to four sides, because a diamond can also have four sides. A trapezoid can also have four sides. A rectangle is a four-sided shape with four 90-degree angles and two pairs of lines of uneven lengths. Even then, suffering and bad are not the same thing because you haven't yet defined "bad." When asked to define what bad means, we were asked, instead, to define it. Or we were just told that "suffering = bad." But that's like saying "suffering = suffering" or "bad= bad." Obviously a rectangle isn't equivalent to four sides, otherwise 'four sides' and rectangle would be interchangeable, which they are not. They are two different things. So are 'suffering' and 'bad.' So, tell us- what is 'bad?' (as it is already rather clear what suffering is).

Anonymous Tue May 5 10:52:04 2020 No.15280553

>>15279887
If the definition of "suffering" can include good things, then we need some other words for the bad things, and the anti-natalist argument will use this new word instead of "suffering".
If you claim that there is no bad thing in the universe, then I will gently point out how much of a hypocrite you are by reminding you of the entire history of evolution and how even right now, just by existing the way you do, you are doing about 500 things to avoid suffering. (Living in a house shielding you from the environment, using a computer, using clothes, brushing your teeth, eating, etc etc etc etc).
Every organism, literally every single one, is programmed to avoid suffering. Humans are just very cognizant of their suffering, on top of this programming. That's what makes it especially bad.

Anonymous Tue May 5 10:52:29 2020 No.15280558

>>15280486
>I won't care about that
you don't care about your kids?
kek what else you can expect from natalists

>I am having fun watching people like you get mad and devolve into pejorative-slinging. It's almost like anti-natalism is just thinly-veiled ressentiment and victimhood
cope slave cope. you have a whole fucking family to take care off. go lick the boots of your boss in order to provider consooming goods for your little fucking leeches and the roastie.

Anonymous Tue May 5 10:54:58 2020 No.15280580

>>15280529
Incredibly low IQ. A rectangle by definition has four sides regardless of any other parallelogram. The objective irrefutable truth of the analytic statement is not reduced or countered by the existence of other parallelograms.
Suffering is by definition bad regardless of the existence of other things which are bad.

Anonymous Tue May 5 10:55:36 2020 No.15280590

>>15280529
>First of all, a rectangle is not equal to four sides, because a diamond can also have four sides. A trapezoid can also have four sides. A rectangle is a four-sided shape
Are you a college level student?

>A rectangle is not equal to four sides.
>A rectangle is a four-sided shape...

What the fuck is wrong with you? They never said 4 sides is the only defining feature, but that 4 sides is a must.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 10:57:03 2020 No.15280599 >>15280590 These shit for brains idiots are very low IQ and it's quite sad. They believe they can "disprove" anti natalist philosophy if they can "disprove" the existence of bad experience. Very stupid! especially because i am not even an antinatalist.

Anonymous Tue May 5 10:58:39 2020 No.15280614

>>15280508
You have no grasp of logic whatsoever.
>pointing out the objective reality that suffering is bad and to be avoided by definition.
I'd cast aside the 'bad' implying 'to be avoided'. But that's not what you are doing, as you use a simple coordination between the two.
The 'by definition' is of course of paramount importance here. You try to put an ad hoc definition to fit the terms into your premade arguments. Many people could and in fact should define suffering in terms that do not imply 'bad'.
Putting 'objective reality' in front of it doesn't make it better. In fact worse, considering the statement would not be one of reality, even if it was true. Being a reality also contradicts your next sentence saying it is a priori.

Anonymous Tue May 5 11:00:14 2020 No.15280630

If suffering isn't bad then why does my body and mind have such a strong immediate instinctive and visceral reaction to it
To me it really seems like trying to reason that suffering somehow isn't bad is basically the mother of all copes and also achieves absolutely nothing
I mean yeah if I just lie to myself and say that all bad things are really good things I guess things don't seem so bad who would've thought

Anonymous Tue May 5 11:02:41 2020 No.15280649

>>15280614
>You have no grasp of logic whatsoever.
I literally study mathematics in graduate school
>I'd cast aside the 'bad' implying 'to be avoided'. But that's not what you are doing, as you use a simple coordination between the two.
Bad things are to be avoided by definition - it is an analytic a priori.
>The 'by definition' is of course of paramount importance here. You try to put an ad hoc definition to fit the terms into your premade arguments
Again, *I* am not ad hoc presupposing anything, all I am doing is explaining that it is an analytic a priori that suffering is bad and to be avoided, as if it weren't, it wouldn't be suffering.

Anonymous Tue May 5 11:03:09 2020 No.15280652
File: 367 KB, 1600x901, PygmyElephants.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15280614
If you put a single celled organism in a medium hostile to it, it will move away from the aggressor substance.
Every single life form, even the most basic ones, have mechanisms to avoid suffering.
You are trying to put forth the absolute ultimate cope, and it's absolutely ridiculous to anyone that experiences hardcore unavoidable disease or shit like this in their lives.
But yeah go on telling people how everything can be made good through pure mind over matter or whatever other cope you picked.

Anonymous Tue May 5 11:04:05 2020 No.15280658

>>15280630
Suffering being bad and to be avoided is NOT a synthetic a priori, so you do NOT need to justify it based on you "personal experience".
Suffering is bad and to be avoided by DEFINITION, NOT by how it relates to things in the "real world". It is an ANALYTIC, not SYNTHETIC, a priori.
There does not need to be a single case of suffering in the universe for suffering to still be bad and to be avoided by definition.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:10:47 2020 No.15280697 File: 129 KB, 900x551, 1588686209650.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15280089 retard

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:13:25 2020 No.15280710 >>15280089 Literally every thing you dislike about this world (even anti-natalists), or everything you deem bad, or everything you deem is wrong about mankind, only exists because people kept having children for millennia. How do you refute this?

Anonymous Tue May 5 11:15:42 2020 No.15280729

>>15280089
>Why does humanity matter? Why should we be humane?
Because suffering is bad and we have a big brain that can avoid perpetuating it by adopting anti-natalism.
If you personally want to suffer as much as possible that is your prerogative, but no one else should have you making decisions for them.
Incidentally, can I ask you something? Are you in favor of circumcision?

Anonymous Tue May 5 11:16:39 2020 No.15280735

>>15280630
>>15280652
You're very dense here.
>body and mind have such a strong immediate instinctive and visceral reaction to it
That could be a characterization of suffering, not of evil. You first sentence meaning.
>If suffering isn't bad then why do I feel it as suffering?
Your whole 'argument' is that feelings you want to avoid are evil. This is false. Many things are unpleasant to even a great degree that are good.
Trying to score sad points by bringing about that there is suffering it is just pathetic. It has no place in the argument. Do you think I've never suffered?
The 'cope' line is the usual claim of false consciousness against anyone with a different view.

>>15280649
>>I literally study mathematics in graduate school
Then you might want to read up on it. Also happens that I am a mathematics graduate.
You clearly don't understand what a priori means. If you are dealing with purely essential terms there is no room for reality.
Of course you are just shitposting, bit for any other anon, you can read Duns Scot who first expose it, Bolzano (his theory of science or even just the anti-kant) or finally Husserl (logical investigations).

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:17:57 2020 No.15280740 >>15280735 Define "suffering".

Anonymous Tue May 5 11:19:10 2020 No.15280746

>>15280735
>Then you might want to read up on it. Also happens that I am a mathematics graduate.
You are not
>You clearly don't understand what a priori means.
Yes, I do
>If you are dealing with purely essential terms there is no room for reality.
I am not doing anything that's faulty or worthy of argumentation against me
>Of course you are just shitposting
No, I am not.
Anti-Kantian philosophy has never been sufficient to refute Kant. Bolzano failed, moron. Kant remains unrefuted (because he is right)

Anonymous Tue May 5 11:24:06 2020 No.15280786

>>15280740
Physical or mental pain.
By https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/suffering?q=suffering
Which might really be used as a synonym of pain, but the second is sometimes seen as just physical.
If you claim that pain is evil, even more so claiming that it is so 'analytic a priori' like the other retard, the discussion can be closed.

>>15280746
>Bolzano failed, moron. Kant remains unrefuted (because he is right)
Laughs in Prihonsky.jpg

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:26:29 2020 No.15280802 >>15280658 So suffering is bad, and something that is bad is to be avoided, so suffering is to be avoided? And the suffering from working out and wracking your brain writing poetry/prose is not suffering because you're not avoiding it?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:26:45 2020 No.15280805 >>15277214 Sure suffering isn't bad, that means you won't stop me from murdering, raping and beating children and animals.

Anonymous Tue May 5 11:29:03 2020 No.15280815

>>15280735

>Your whole 'argument' is that feelings you want to avoid are evil. This is false.

Why does this even matter?
Whether they're good or evil or whatever else you want to call them it changes nothing
If you want to avoid it you want to avoid it
Will any amount of semantic prancing around protect me from feeling pain if I get stabbed with a knife? If not then why should I care?

Anonymous Tue May 5 11:31:12 2020 No.15280826

>>15280786
Physical/mental pain are bad things that the body tends to avoid in the absence of coping mechanisms. I challenge you to find any exception (and I'll be glad to point out how wrong you are).
You need some reward/coping mechanism to withstand physical/mental pain.
However there are physical/mental pains that surpass all existing coping mechanisms and rewards, for human beings. When I say suffering is bad, I'm using this word as a shortcut to say we try to avoid it, not to give it a quality of "evil". It's "bad" as in "eating this is bad for you/will hurt you/cause you negative effects" not as in "this is something evil created by Satan".
But it doesn't really matter if it's "evil" or not. We evolved to avoid it. The existence of life necessitates this avoidance. This is why we feel pain in the first place, it's not some fucking random thing our brain does just for fun
If you can find a really good reason to have children and perpetuate life and whatnot, I guess that could overcome the potential suffering you'll cause. But I have never seen someone give a good answer to that.

Also same question as above. What is your stance on circumcision?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:33:16 2020 No.15280839 >>15280805 Stopping you from doing that is pure arational reflex though.

Anonymous Tue May 5 11:34:46 2020 No.15280845

>>15280802
If working out gave you absolutely no health benefits, no endorfins and no rewards, but only extreme amounts of physical pain, would you still do it?
Say you have a bad shoulder, and exercising it means searing pain, not just soreness, and in the long run it's not gonna make you stronger/prettier/more healthy, but will just mean you can't use your arm anymore. Would you still do it?
See how easy it is to break your stupid bullshit argument?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:35:09 2020 No.15280849 >>15280826 So it's bad to cause suffering, and having children causes the child to suffering? Does not having children cause the children not to suffer?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:35:46 2020 No.15280860 >>15277332 Being plugged into a matrix of hell would be even worse.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:36:29 2020 No.15280866 >>15277249 >>15277344 Growing into what? Learning what?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:37:42 2020 No.15280877 >>15280849 The moment a child is born they are in a world where they might end up suffering. This wouldn't be true if they hadn't been born. You decided to put them here. You could've decided not to by not conceiving them in the first place.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:38:52 2020 No.15280886 >>15280845 So it is suffering, but it is not bad suffering because it brings you pleasure, right? Is your argument that life is not worth bringing into existence because of bad suffering that causes no greater pleasure?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:38:52 2020 No.15280887 >>15280786 >Laughs in Prihonsky.jpg Low IQ >>15280802 There is no suffering in working out or writing poetry, that is not suffering, as I already explained.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:40:12 2020 No.15280894 >>15280877 Why should I not bring a child into a world where they might end up suffering? Please don't respond with attempted tu quoques.

Anonymous Tue May 5 11:43:21 2020 No.15280918

>>15280887
I am not a reader of philosophy, so you'll have to bear with me. Can the promise of success (without actual success) make something not suffering? For example, a martyr might resist torture for the promise of heaven. Is he not suffering in that moment, assuming that heaven does not exist (for if it did, it wouldn't be suffering)?

Anonymous Tue May 5 11:44:50 2020 No.15280931

>>15280886
>Is your argument that life is not worth bringing into existence because of bad suffering that causes no greater pleasure?
If you want to separate things into "bad suffering" and "good suffering", sure. I'd say antinatalism is about the "bad suffering".
But I wouldn't call that soreness after a work out suffering in the first place.
>>15280894
Because that guarantees they won't suffer, whereas you can't guarantee the same otherwise. This is the whole premise of antinatalism. It being the only tool that really prevents suffering.
If I had a way of knowing my child will never go through severe suffering that overwhelms their coping mechanisms (this includes modern medicine/etc), I would have no problem with having a child. But since I can't guarantee this I feel it's immoral to make that bet with someone else's life.
I keep asking about circumcision because this is one that typically people in favor of having children seem to disagree with, right?
"How dare you circumcise a child when they don't get a say in the matter, and you're possibly depriving them of pleasure later in life, and you're causing this incredible amount of pain to the baby".
Well, how dare you put a child in the world? You think they will never go through something painful or that deprives them of pleasure? They didn't consent to being born. (Of course I know it's impossible for them to consent to this, but still).

Anonymous Tue May 5 11:46:49 2020 No.15280946

>>15280918
That promise of success is a coping mechanism. It's someone choosing to believe this to get through the suffering. I would say maybe this might have some effect in the suffering, but I'm not sure. The thing is, since you can't expect everyone to make that same choice, I don't see how it makes sense to keep putting people in the world. Not everyone wants to be a martyr. Why should we force them?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:48:01 2020 No.15280953 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrei_Chikatilo Hey, sophists, what do you think about this lad?

Anonymous Tue May 5 11:50:04 2020 No.15280964

>>15280953
Good because he prevented several people from suffering the rest of their lives and begetting children that would eventually suffer, something that greatly outweighs the pleasure they might have felt and suffering they'll cause to close ones and others.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:51:48 2020 No.15280976 >>15277247 >suffering is bad but i wont explain why, nothing told me

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:52:45 2020 No.15280982 File: 231 KB, 584x657, kitty.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15277655 Based on what?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:52:52 2020 No.15280983 >>15278324 yes.

Anonymous Tue May 5 11:54:30 2020 No.15280997

>>15280964
But none of it would have happened if this retard wasn't born. And if all those kids weren't born, they would not have to experience their eyes being cut out and their nipples bitten off, while they were still alive, and so much more. Good try, sophist.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 11:55:09 2020 No.15281001 >>15279849 Can't believe Martin Van Buren was so based.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 12:00:43 2020 No.15281037 >>15280997 Anti-natalism isn't enough to stop people from reproducing. You need to be an efilist

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 12:03:24 2020 No.15281060 >>15279849 When you and the rest of your faggot kind dies a pitiless death by the side of a muddy riverbank, me and my inbred children shall repopulate the world.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 12:09:57 2020 No.15281121 >>15280435 Why?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 12:15:46 2020 No.15281185 >>15279008 retarded argument you refute yourself , why would that be bad?

Anonymous Tue May 5 12:20:41 2020 No.15281232

>>15281185
It'd be bad because the act of rape in itself is bad. This is because it violates someone's consent while they're unaware. You can't do this to an "unborn" because unborn literally do not exist. How many unborn are there? Just the one you envision? Hundreds? Millions? An infinite amount? Then every minute we don't bring one into existence, we are doing a good thing. The few times we bring one into existence amount to nothing ultimately in the face of this. The difference b/w AN and N is like the difference between someone who never cheats on homework and someone who cheated once or twice; not in terms of how much suffering they'll cause, but in terms of the difference between how "moral" they are. The analogy goes only that far, so don't talk about how "muh cheaters get bit in the ass" (as if that's a guarantee; such optimism is rich coming from pessimists)

Anonymous Tue May 5 12:22:02 2020 No.15281243

Look at all these inane children itt who think you can convert a universe of suffering into fuel for your character arc. The body is a prison, Nietzsche was a fool, he was terrified of being called a quitter. Go write pretty poems in the void while everything dies around you.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 12:24:52 2020 No.15281258 >>15279828 fatal retard alert

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 12:26:14 2020 No.15281275 >>15281243 Your pessimism is pathetic and holds only you back. If your favorite philosophers gave up like you want us to, where'd you be?

Anonymous Tue May 5 12:28:15 2020 No.15281288

>>15280486
>It's almost like anti-natalism is just thinly-veiled ressentiment and victimhood

it's almost like you have to assume the defect is in others rather than the senseless game you inflict on generation after generation. more fresh meat for death, nom nom nom

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 12:30:04 2020 No.15281301 >>15281232 >le consent meme Wow, what a cuckold you are. Rape is bad because it's the act of stealing a woman's chastity. Of course if the thot has no concept of it in the first place, then the idea of 'rape' is meaningless.

Anonymous Tue May 5 12:30:52 2020 No.15281307

>>15281288
Why is anti-natalism sensible, and natalism senseless? We all die, nothing matters. As anon said, just a badge to pin on your chest, essentially nothing more than, as >>15281243
said, "pretty poems in the void while everything dies around you." It's just that your poems are a little on the affected, "humane" side.

Anonymous Tue May 5 12:32:14 2020 No.15281319

>>15281301
And if someone can't feel pain then the concept of "pain/suffering" is meaningless, which is just about as common as a thot not knowing what rape is. It's not about chastity, it's about "muh/le consent meme" because you can refute things by attaching the meme words to it

Anonymous Tue May 5 12:32:45 2020 No.15281323

>>15281275
Holding me back from what? Can you even begin to articulate what you're doing and why? Where would I be? I don't care because I haven't projected the capitalist work week into the root of the universe, I'd be doing the same thing you're all doing: swallowing bodies to maintain your own, until it is swallowed in turn.

If your answer is a Rocky montage, you're hopelessly sheltered. As if all of history and the world has conspired towards the "character growth" of Americans. Give me a break.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 12:33:05 2020 No.15281327 EVERYBODY HERE NEEDS TO LOOK UP 'GNOSTICISM'

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 12:34:13 2020 No.15281334 >>15281307 because the logical conclusion to "everything dies and doesn't matter" isn't "pump more bodies into the cosmic thresher YOLO" you doof

Anonymous Tue May 5 12:36:55 2020 No.15281353

>>15281323
Yes, I can articulate what I'm doing and why, but you could never understand it. Is it the same with you?

>I haven't projected the capitalist work week into the root of the universe
And what'll you get out of this? What do you live for? Just to get by?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 12:37:06 2020 No.15281355 >>15281301 with these disgusting nobody is going to marry you faggot

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 12:37:57 2020 No.15281365 >>15281334 Why is it "don't pump more bodies into the cosmic thresher?" Is this one of those self-evident things that you think I don't understand because I'm "low IQ," or do you have more concrete reasoning?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 12:40:06 2020 No.15281384 File: 764 KB, 2048x1382, 1582506975476.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15280982 Nothing.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 12:41:22 2020 No.15281399 >>15280982 lil b

Anonymous Tue May 5 12:42:51 2020 No.15281413

>>15281365
Death is as concrete a reason as there can be. Feeding a game whose one and only condition is its end for you and everyone you love, just so you can pay yourself on your back for conquering an infinitesimal portion of it (if you're exceedingly lucky), is insane and senseless, it is the rationale of an addict. "This time... " Even the happiest life is still purchased with bodies. People and animals die alone and in agony all the time and there is no one to save them, but don't worry Spencer just started working out in his garage it's all gonna be good bro

there is no self-correcting moral calculus at the heart of being, and you are a fool if you think otherwise

Anonymous Tue May 5 12:48:08 2020 No.15281458

>>15281413
> Feeding a game whose one and only condition is its end for you and everyone you love
So what?

>so you can pay yourself on your back for conquering an infinitesimal portion of it
Like AN pat themselves on the back for achieving some elusive "moral" state in their short lives?

Who cares if all of this happens? We all die in the end, and everything that happens here won't matter in light of an eternity of nonexistence. I'm not going to hell, I'm going nowhere, like everyone else, Andrei Chikatilo or not.

Anonymous Tue May 5 12:54:29 2020 No.15281513

>>15281458
>I'm a self-aggrandizing narcissist so you must be to

I have no illusions about what this game is outside of the artificiality of civilization, you have no right to speak for the billions of lives trapped in it like you are, I might not either but at least I'm not getting my script from a pinterest wall.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 12:56:31 2020 No.15281528 >>15281458 >who cares bro just keep feeding Death don't ask questions the natalist outs himself as the real nihilist, lmao delicious. slave of ialdabaoth

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 12:58:23 2020 No.15281546 >>15281513 So why should I not confine someone to a shitty life if I decide that that's what I want and I don't get punished for doing it? T

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 12:59:33 2020 No.15281552 >>15281528 So you believe in supernatural entities? Furthermore, why does it matter if one is a nihilist?

Anonymous Tue May 5 13:01:06 2020 No.15281564

>>15281546
you can, but don't pretend you speak for others, for animals, for kids, for the legions of the dead, and definitely don't pretend like all of this was designed with your self-actualization in mind. you can live a reasonably full life with what you're given without these saccharine illusions

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 13:02:23 2020 No.15281569 >>15281552 "Ialdabaoth" is a catch-word for the system of death and exploitation that defines life as struggle. A nihilist debating an antinatalist is just a hedonist.

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 13:04:32 2020 No.15281584 >>15281564 So animals should become anti-natalists as well? What legions of the dead? What saccharine illusions?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 13:06:47 2020 No.15281604 >>15281569 If life is evil, does that make you an efilist?

>>	Anonymous Tue May 5 13:50:28 2020 No.15282069 >>15279008 >If an innocent 12 year old girl got raped and it somehow resulted in no suffering, it'd still be bad. Why?

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature