This is incredibly stupid and i can't believe someone took the time of his day to make such an atrocious, fallacious image. Much better to explain through the lens of religion if you're resorting to nonsensical bullshit as this
This could be refuted if you assume panpsychism, where what precedes and succedes our more complex and organized consciousness is not nothingness, but merely a less organized state of material consciousness that we arose from and return to. So death doesn't represent an end to consciousness, but rather a return to a much lower level of consciousness than that capable of self-awareness.
I think he's tall. His brother is some kind of gene professor or something and he's a big Chad looking guy. I don't think there's actually any photos of him online
You read about Jiwoon hwang? Horrible story. Guy writes a promortalist essay and dies for his beliefs (based). But actually fricks up his suicide attempt and spends weeks on life support brain dead until they switch the machine off.
How do you even frick up a suicide attempt? Just put your car in the garage, close the door, turn the car on, and drift off into a painless death as the carbon monoxide kills you. I don't understand people who try some other method of suicide that has a risk of failing when doing it painlessly and in a foolproof way is so easy.
You read about Jiwoon hwang? Horrible story. Guy writes a promortalist essay and dies for his beliefs (based). But actually fricks up his suicide attempt and spends weeks on life support brain dead until they switch the machine off.
Pic related was an antinatalist that committed suicide
>I’m an antinatalist. I think it’s unforgivable to bring new people into this world given that there is suffering. The thing is that lately I’ve been thinking and feeling that people aren’t real. This would partially solve the problem of evil. There is just my suffering and everyone else is a simulation designed to spite me. This should cause me to not feel so antinatalist since the breeders are disgusting alien mockeries of a true human being, namely myself. Yet somehow I still feel very antinatalist. When I see children with their parents I am disgusted at the entire concept. They are probably just facets of the simulation and not souls brimming with the inner light of awareness like myself. And yet they still move me enough to cause disgust. I suppose that was the intention of the designer(s), to create something that appeared so real that it was actually disturbing. Dr. Miller says I have some sort of syndrome after finding out about my solipsism. I think he’s an imbecile who deserves to be burned on a stake. But out of my bodhisattva-like compassion I would instead grant him a consciousness and send him to heaven forever.
Most people, when asked, would say they prefer to continue to exist, even with painless instant death options available. To them at least, the suffering is worth it.
Well yes, but lots of things we do carry risk of harm to others, like driving a car for example. We only avoid risk when it gets too high, eg if you don't have time to parent, you shouldn't have a child.
People are literally genetically programmed not to get this nuance. It's the hard limit to their rationality, hence people equating it with violence against children or suicide. It's only those things on a subliminal level.
Honestly, I don't think antinatalism is anywhere near a universal truth, which I think is clearly demonstrated by how many people genuinely enjoy their lives. I just know that it's true for me, that I've been unhappy while alive and I would much prefer to not exist. it's probably because I'm a reclusive autist without a future. >inb4 have a nice day then
Already tried plenty of times, but I've been stopped every time. If I had a means with assured success, I would in a heartbeat. I'm a depressed homosexual, but at least I'm consistent, unlike these "ooooh I'm an antinatalist and existence isn't worth it but I'm not gonna die because reasons" posers.
>Benatar's policy prescription is untenable. Radical anti-natalism as a recipe for human extinction will fail because any predisposition to share that bias will be weeded out of the population. Radical anti-natalist ethics is self-defeating: there will always be selection pressure against its practitioners. Complications aside, any predisposition not to have children or to adopt is genetically maladaptive. On a personal level, the decision not to bring more suffering into the world and forgo having children is morally admirable. But voluntary childlessness or adoption is not a global solution to the problem of suffering.
>Yet how should rational moral agents behave if - hypothetically - some variant of Benatar's diagnosis as distinct from policy prescription was correct?
>In an era of biotechnology and unnatural selection, an alternative to anti-natalism is the world-wide adoption of genetically preprogrammed well-being. For there needn't be selection pressure against gradients of lifelong adaptive bliss - i.e. a radical recalibration of the hedonic treadmill. The only way to eradicate the biological substrates of unpleasantness - and thereby prevent the harm of Darwinian existence - is not vainly to champion life's eradication, but instead to ensure that sentient life is inherently blissful. More specifically, the impending reproductive revolution of designer babies is likely to witness intense selection pressure against the harmfulness-promoting adaptations that increased the inclusive fitness of our genes in the ancestral environment of adaptation. If we use biotechnology wisely, then gradients of genetically preprogrammed well-being can make all sentient life subjectively rewarding - indeed wonderful beyond the human imagination. So in common with "positive" utilitarians, the "negative" utilitarian would do better to argue for genetically preprogrammed superhappiness.
Yeah, love Dutton. I just see AN as the final boss of Anglo Utilitarian ideology, even if I sympathize with it. Just another bottleneck.
3 weeks ago
Anonymous
As an addendum I think AN people have a more correct value system than your average Childfree hedonistic moron, it's just not as correct as religiosity as a resolution to suffering. I watched some interview with this technocrat investment-bro homosexual who said his son said "The Childfree people are alright it's the Antinatalists who are crazy," when it's the exact opposite. AN people at least show concern for the unborn even if their prescription is insufficient.
Because pain is a more direct and simple motivating principle than pleasure, we should expect net suffering to predominate within the domain of life, with this suffering increasing for every moment life continues to exist. Even if we were able to eliminate all life on earth this moment, the past net suffering would still have occurred, and there is likely life with the same negative utilitarian calculus countless other places in the universe. The only way to take this preponderance of suffering and make it so that it has been worthwhile is to use our opportunity of conscious and intelligent existence and take the dumb matter of the universe and construct as many new minds designed specifically to feel constant pleasure as possible out of it. Given how much more non-conscious matter there is in the universe than the relatively tiny amount currently engaged in conscious awareness, this would be able to swamp and overcome the net suffering of life and turn the universe from a place of net suffering into a place of net pleasure. So, it should be the moral imperative of all who love pleasure and loathe suffering to direct the technological progress of civilization towards the end of constructing as many minds experiencing constant pleasure as possible out of the matter of the universe. Unlike human minds, these artificial minds could be constructed specifically so they never tire or bore of pleasure, and every moment until the heat death of the universe is as joyous as the first. This may seem like a simple idea, but its importance cannot be overstated, as this program of converting the universe into minds experiencing pleasure is the only way to undo and reverse the natural tendency of the universe towards being a place of net suffering, and instead turn it into a realm of joy and contentment. The technological and philosophical abilities of humankind and any superintelligences we create should be directed towards this end of figuring out how to construct and propagate such minds, as no cause that we could engage in is more worthy.
What a bizzare post. "Net suffering" is an abstraction. It matters to nobody (except cringey utilitarians). Suggesting we create countless beings (capable of experiencing great suffering) in service of the God of net pleasure is moronic. "Net" suffering doesn't even exist. Suffering is personal, individualized.
That's like saying economic forces don't exist, only individual transactions and agreements.
But why stop there? People are just an abstraction, in reality they're just cells working together, which is also just an abstraction. Only interacting quantum fields exist.
>"Net suffering" is an abstraction. It matters to nobody
I have a strong suspicion that consciousness is explained by there being a universal "overmind" that experiences all conscious states in the universe simultaneously, and by its experience of them provides them their reality. If this is the case, then the degree of net pleasure or suffering among all extant minds is the degree of pleasure or suffering within this universal mind, and therefore maximizing pleasure minus suffering maximizes the pleasantness of the conscious experience of this mind at any given moment. This is why maximizing total pleasure throughout the universe matters, and why increasing the number of created minds designed to experience pleasure becomes imperative.
These guys committing suicide need to stop taking life so seriously man. It's sad. I mean what does it even matter - we are all dead in 80 years. What's the need to make these grand (violent) rebellions against your existence? What you want is gonna happen anyway, but thisnway you made mom sad ;_;
Live on bros, even if life isn't worth living. Stop taking it all so seriously.
anti-existence gays when you put a gun to their head
>NOOOOOOO DON’T KILL ME PLEASE DON’T SEND ME TO ETERNAL NOTHINGNESS NOOOOOOO
>eternal nothingness
Eternal nothingness is bullshit. There are a lot of plausible mechanisms for how an afterlife could potentially exist.
https://alwaysasking.com/is-there-life-after-death/
True, but antinatalists are typically also atheists
This is incredibly stupid and i can't believe someone took the time of his day to make such an atrocious, fallacious image. Much better to explain through the lens of religion if you're resorting to nonsensical bullshit as this
Brainlet
This could be refuted if you assume panpsychism, where what precedes and succedes our more complex and organized consciousness is not nothingness, but merely a less organized state of material consciousness that we arose from and return to. So death doesn't represent an end to consciousness, but rather a return to a much lower level of consciousness than that capable of self-awareness.
That sounds horrifying.
the philosophy is still correct even if as meat robots we are programmed to resist it
Do not forget he is South African . Do not forget he is israeli . Do not forget he is small .
I think he's tall. His brother is some kind of gene professor or something and he's a big Chad looking guy. I don't think there's actually any photos of him online
It's somewhat difficult to find philosophers who argue in favor of suicide.
You read about Jiwoon hwang? Horrible story. Guy writes a promortalist essay and dies for his beliefs (based). But actually fricks up his suicide attempt and spends weeks on life support brain dead until they switch the machine off.
Hadn't heard of him, thanks.
A big reason why I'd be scared to ever do it. Too much risk of survival.
Brandt Gill is another one
I never heard of this guy and he seems to have no videos.
man he was cute tho
How do you even frick up a suicide attempt? Just put your car in the garage, close the door, turn the car on, and drift off into a painless death as the carbon monoxide kills you. I don't understand people who try some other method of suicide that has a risk of failing when doing it painlessly and in a foolproof way is so easy.
Pic related was an antinatalist that committed suicide
https://vitrifyher.wordpress.com/2019/12/19/antinatalism-in-purgatory/
>I’m an antinatalist. I think it’s unforgivable to bring new people into this world given that there is suffering. The thing is that lately I’ve been thinking and feeling that people aren’t real. This would partially solve the problem of evil. There is just my suffering and everyone else is a simulation designed to spite me. This should cause me to not feel so antinatalist since the breeders are disgusting alien mockeries of a true human being, namely myself. Yet somehow I still feel very antinatalist. When I see children with their parents I am disgusted at the entire concept. They are probably just facets of the simulation and not souls brimming with the inner light of awareness like myself. And yet they still move me enough to cause disgust. I suppose that was the intention of the designer(s), to create something that appeared so real that it was actually disturbing. Dr. Miller says I have some sort of syndrome after finding out about my solipsism. I think he’s an imbecile who deserves to be burned on a stake. But out of my bodhisattva-like compassion I would instead grant him a consciousness and send him to heaven forever.
I guess it's better
to have loved than to lost
And never stumbled across
The gift of knowing you
Whatever the fricking cost.
>This quote refutes antinatalism - life's worth is in its meaning and not a utilitarian calculus of pain/pleasure.
Most people, when asked, would say they prefer to continue to exist, even with painless instant death options available. To them at least, the suffering is worth it.
But there's a difference between continuing to live and starting a life for another person.
Well yes, but lots of things we do carry risk of harm to others, like driving a car for example. We only avoid risk when it gets too high, eg if you don't have time to parent, you shouldn't have a child.
Where'd you get this driving a car example? I wrote a long ass post on reddit recently with the same example. Don't copy me.
NTA and can't tell if you're being sarcastic (Reddit) but you're a moron if you think you made up the example of social acceptance of risk/driving.
People are literally genetically programmed not to get this nuance. It's the hard limit to their rationality, hence people equating it with violence against children or suicide. It's only those things on a subliminal level.
Anti antinatalist have to be all trolls, I refuse to believe they are this dense.
Just stop having kids, bro.
Really, if existence is that bad, suicide isn't the answer. Mass murder and then suicide is. After all, you'd be doing them a favor.
Honestly, I don't think antinatalism is anywhere near a universal truth, which I think is clearly demonstrated by how many people genuinely enjoy their lives. I just know that it's true for me, that I've been unhappy while alive and I would much prefer to not exist. it's probably because I'm a reclusive autist without a future.
>inb4 have a nice day then
Already tried plenty of times, but I've been stopped every time. If I had a means with assured success, I would in a heartbeat. I'm a depressed homosexual, but at least I'm consistent, unlike these "ooooh I'm an antinatalist and existence isn't worth it but I'm not gonna die because reasons" posers.
Benatar was deboonked by David Pearce
https://www.abolitionist.com/anti-natalism.html
>Benatar's policy prescription is untenable. Radical anti-natalism as a recipe for human extinction will fail because any predisposition to share that bias will be weeded out of the population. Radical anti-natalist ethics is self-defeating: there will always be selection pressure against its practitioners. Complications aside, any predisposition not to have children or to adopt is genetically maladaptive. On a personal level, the decision not to bring more suffering into the world and forgo having children is morally admirable. But voluntary childlessness or adoption is not a global solution to the problem of suffering.
>Yet how should rational moral agents behave if - hypothetically - some variant of Benatar's diagnosis as distinct from policy prescription was correct?
>In an era of biotechnology and unnatural selection, an alternative to anti-natalism is the world-wide adoption of genetically preprogrammed well-being. For there needn't be selection pressure against gradients of lifelong adaptive bliss - i.e. a radical recalibration of the hedonic treadmill. The only way to eradicate the biological substrates of unpleasantness - and thereby prevent the harm of Darwinian existence - is not vainly to champion life's eradication, but instead to ensure that sentient life is inherently blissful. More specifically, the impending reproductive revolution of designer babies is likely to witness intense selection pressure against the harmfulness-promoting adaptations that increased the inclusive fitness of our genes in the ancestral environment of adaptation. If we use biotechnology wisely, then gradients of genetically preprogrammed well-being can make all sentient life subjectively rewarding - indeed wonderful beyond the human imagination. So in common with "positive" utilitarians, the "negative" utilitarian would do better to argue for genetically preprogrammed superhappiness.
Wow that's even worse. Obvious to anyone with a pulse that it's a selection event though.
Yeah, love Dutton. I just see AN as the final boss of Anglo Utilitarian ideology, even if I sympathize with it. Just another bottleneck.
As an addendum I think AN people have a more correct value system than your average Childfree hedonistic moron, it's just not as correct as religiosity as a resolution to suffering. I watched some interview with this technocrat investment-bro homosexual who said his son said "The Childfree people are alright it's the Antinatalists who are crazy," when it's the exact opposite. AN people at least show concern for the unborn even if their prescription is insufficient.
More hedonism? More drugs?
Rule number 1: Don't take advice from suicides.
Because pain is a more direct and simple motivating principle than pleasure, we should expect net suffering to predominate within the domain of life, with this suffering increasing for every moment life continues to exist. Even if we were able to eliminate all life on earth this moment, the past net suffering would still have occurred, and there is likely life with the same negative utilitarian calculus countless other places in the universe. The only way to take this preponderance of suffering and make it so that it has been worthwhile is to use our opportunity of conscious and intelligent existence and take the dumb matter of the universe and construct as many new minds designed specifically to feel constant pleasure as possible out of it. Given how much more non-conscious matter there is in the universe than the relatively tiny amount currently engaged in conscious awareness, this would be able to swamp and overcome the net suffering of life and turn the universe from a place of net suffering into a place of net pleasure. So, it should be the moral imperative of all who love pleasure and loathe suffering to direct the technological progress of civilization towards the end of constructing as many minds experiencing constant pleasure as possible out of the matter of the universe. Unlike human minds, these artificial minds could be constructed specifically so they never tire or bore of pleasure, and every moment until the heat death of the universe is as joyous as the first. This may seem like a simple idea, but its importance cannot be overstated, as this program of converting the universe into minds experiencing pleasure is the only way to undo and reverse the natural tendency of the universe towards being a place of net suffering, and instead turn it into a realm of joy and contentment. The technological and philosophical abilities of humankind and any superintelligences we create should be directed towards this end of figuring out how to construct and propagate such minds, as no cause that we could engage in is more worthy.
What a bizzare post. "Net suffering" is an abstraction. It matters to nobody (except cringey utilitarians). Suggesting we create countless beings (capable of experiencing great suffering) in service of the God of net pleasure is moronic. "Net" suffering doesn't even exist. Suffering is personal, individualized.
That's like saying economic forces don't exist, only individual transactions and agreements.
But why stop there? People are just an abstraction, in reality they're just cells working together, which is also just an abstraction. Only interacting quantum fields exist.
Your post is like saying we should sacrifice worker rights for "the economy"
They don't. Money is just a legal fiction agreed on by society. It's as real as godzilla and faithful women.
>"Net suffering" is an abstraction. It matters to nobody
I have a strong suspicion that consciousness is explained by there being a universal "overmind" that experiences all conscious states in the universe simultaneously, and by its experience of them provides them their reality. If this is the case, then the degree of net pleasure or suffering among all extant minds is the degree of pleasure or suffering within this universal mind, and therefore maximizing pleasure minus suffering maximizes the pleasantness of the conscious experience of this mind at any given moment. This is why maximizing total pleasure throughout the universe matters, and why increasing the number of created minds designed to experience pleasure becomes imperative.
Kys you demoralising fed.
These guys committing suicide need to stop taking life so seriously man. It's sad. I mean what does it even matter - we are all dead in 80 years. What's the need to make these grand (violent) rebellions against your existence? What you want is gonna happen anyway, but thisnway you made mom sad ;_;
Live on bros, even if life isn't worth living. Stop taking it all so seriously.
>author still here
well clearly life is worth living