Quote from: Tsirist on January 23, 2016, 09:08:07 PMQuote from: eggsalad on January 23, 2016, 09:05:58 PMQuote from: Tsirist on January 23, 2016, 09:04:04 PMQuote from: eggsalad on January 23, 2016, 09:03:28 PMQuote from: Tsirist on January 23, 2016, 09:03:06 PMWhy would you want to be antinatalist if you can't know what happened before life or what happens after death?shut up you filthy spiritualistWhere is the spiritualism in that?the idea that consciousness exists past physical meansi know the experience of existence itself is surreal and not necessarily sensicalbutit's a deep rabbit holeUnfortunately you don't just get to ignore potential problems for your perspective.The idea of consequences in the afterlife for your actions begets all actions.You cannot say to not do something because it'll negatively effect your afterlife, because it could very equally improve your afterlife. Or it might even hurt your afterlife to not do these things.
Quote from: eggsalad on January 23, 2016, 09:05:58 PMQuote from: Tsirist on January 23, 2016, 09:04:04 PMQuote from: eggsalad on January 23, 2016, 09:03:28 PMQuote from: Tsirist on January 23, 2016, 09:03:06 PMWhy would you want to be antinatalist if you can't know what happened before life or what happens after death?shut up you filthy spiritualistWhere is the spiritualism in that?the idea that consciousness exists past physical meansi know the experience of existence itself is surreal and not necessarily sensicalbutit's a deep rabbit holeUnfortunately you don't just get to ignore potential problems for your perspective.
Quote from: Tsirist on January 23, 2016, 09:04:04 PMQuote from: eggsalad on January 23, 2016, 09:03:28 PMQuote from: Tsirist on January 23, 2016, 09:03:06 PMWhy would you want to be antinatalist if you can't know what happened before life or what happens after death?shut up you filthy spiritualistWhere is the spiritualism in that?the idea that consciousness exists past physical meansi know the experience of existence itself is surreal and not necessarily sensicalbutit's a deep rabbit hole
Quote from: eggsalad on January 23, 2016, 09:03:28 PMQuote from: Tsirist on January 23, 2016, 09:03:06 PMWhy would you want to be antinatalist if you can't know what happened before life or what happens after death?shut up you filthy spiritualistWhere is the spiritualism in that?
Quote from: Tsirist on January 23, 2016, 09:03:06 PMWhy would you want to be antinatalist if you can't know what happened before life or what happens after death?shut up you filthy spiritualist
Why would you want to be antinatalist if you can't know what happened before life or what happens after death?
Because no one wants to suffer, or live in a universe where it's even possible to suffer.
Quote from: Fuddy Duddy II on January 23, 2016, 08:33:31 PMBecause no one wants to suffer, or live in a universe where it's even possible to suffer.I'm okay with it. And I feel as if the majority of people are, as well.
Hold up. Are you now telling me that if I raise my child to be a vegan anti-natalist feminist-socialist, that it's okay to give them life?
Of course it's morally reprehensible to give birth to them, but the cause of anti-natalism needs mouthpieces.
Not at all.
I'm asking you to tell me why killing an infant isn't a morally preferable solution to letting it live a life in which it will experience suffering.
QuoteOf course it's morally reprehensible to give birth to them, but the cause of anti-natalism needs mouthpieces.I feel like you're being a shitter on purpose. Boring night? Been drinking, perhaps?
QuoteNot at all.Why not? They don't have autonomy, so, to you, that means you can impose all you want on them.Right?
QuoteI'm asking you to tell me why killing an infant isn't a morally preferable solution to letting it live a life in which it will experience suffering.Could grow up to be an anti-natalist.I mean, you're purposely changing the subject, but all right.No, if the child was guaranteed to live a life of absolute suffering
Honestly, I didn't mean to be offensive by using the term "mouthpieces". I was just referring to your comment about how anti-natalism needs advocates, and that partially justifies staying alive.
Nope, an average kid. Tell me why an average kid, born in America, should not be murdered in the name of anti-natalism. This isn't a change of subject, it's a foundational justification of the claim that non-life is a far great moral state than life and suffering.
QuoteNope, an average kid. Tell me why an average kid, born in America, should not be murdered in the name of anti-natalism. This isn't a change of subject, it's a foundational justification of the claim that non-life is a far great moral state than life and suffering.Because anti-natalism isn't about murder--it's about not having kids. Killing one person doesn't end all suffering. You'd have to kill everyone, all at once, or no one at all.
Can you articulate why this doesn't extend to childbirth? Everyone stops having kids, or none at all.
Quote from: Connor on January 23, 2016, 09:14:54 PMQuote from: Fuddy Duddy II on January 23, 2016, 08:33:31 PMBecause no one wants to suffer, or live in a universe where it's even possible to suffer.I'm okay with it. And I feel as if the majority of people are, as well.I'm happy that I was circumcised.Does that make circumcision okay?Yeah, probably not.
I disagree. Not specifically in that context, but I'm perfectly alright with trudging through something unpleasant to achieve something good.
Quote from: Connor on January 23, 2016, 11:26:59 PMI disagree. Not specifically in that context, but I'm perfectly alright with trudging through something unpleasant to achieve something good.Yes, YOU are. That doesn't mean it's okay to impose on somebody else, though. That's the point.
Statistically I feel as if enough people share this mentality
Quote from: Connor on January 23, 2016, 11:30:37 PMStatistically I feel as if enough people share this mentalityNot only are they out of touch with reality, they've been indoctrinated. If all you think matters is how your personal life is going, then you have no place talking about ethics or philosophy.
You have nothing to say to someone who gets the raw end of a bad dice roll in life other than "sorry that just happens sometimes", which is an admission of guilt. Sure. Most people have the will to say that life is worth living, and in a cumulative sense, those successes erase the fact failures happen. But in the end you should consider the principle of putting others through that ordeal in order to achieve that net gain.
That's true. This is never going to become mainstream. It goes against our most basic urges of procreation and will be easily dismissed by a majority of people who look at their own lives and those of others before deciding that, in the end, life is well worth living. Anti-natilism is never going to work or catch on.
The same thing has been said about every major movement in history before it happened.
But that's about it.
Those are terrible comparisons. You can't equate movements that already saw a lot of success in other parts of the world or history and that pertain to topics like women voting to a movement that literally goes against one of the number one primal urges of our species.
You're right. Of course, I don't know with absolute certainty that it won't be true.
And that reality is why your philosophy doesn't scare, bother or worry me at all.
The fact that you linked the only actual academic book on anti-natalism that I happen to know of is kind of telling. The fact that it hasn't even received 40 reviews in a decade kind of is too. And so is the fact that most people on the references page are long dead, don't support anti-natalism for anything other than practical reasons (environment, legal wrongful births) or are more or less nobodies.
-natalism won't happen because procreation is a primal drive that has shaped and directed our society, species and lives for hundreds of years
I'm not here to discuss anti-natalism with you again.
If anything, this is some good advice to you. Unless something directly affects a large group of people, you're not going to have it go mainstream without a much better basis. You need to step out of the shadows of obscure academic philosophic publications and people making cringe material on youtube. What you need is an actual movement. Someone eloquent and capable of spreading the message. High quality video productions going viral. Public action at schools and whatnot. Otherwise, this isn't going anywhere beyond being a fringe philosophy adhered to by a handful of "famous" people (like some lawyer trying to bank on wrongful birth and a free culture cartoonist) on wikipedia and an extremely small reddit community that hardly breaks a thousand views on videos that are considered major in their field.