Welshidiot
New Member
Here's a little introductory video to give you the gist of the philosophy of antinatalism:
-
Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
Donations can be made via here
Antinatalism
- Thread starter Welshidiot
- Start date
A very interesting philosophy... a very extreme one. This doesn't appeal to my intellect, however, because I don't believe that objective morality exists. Therefore, statements like "An imposition of life is an imposition of inevitable suffering, therefore humans ought to stop reproducing." has no basis in purely logical philosophical discourse and so people can only appeal to preferences.
The proposed anti-natalism here is the most extreme form: to bring a slow end to human life altogether by completely inhibiting reproduction. This is strange, since most anti-natalists are in favor of this ideology not to bring a "graceful end" to the human species, but to *improve conditions* with the solving of problems such as overpopulation, famine, and depletion of non-renewable resources. The only academic philosopher (and, since I've only found him and a group of YouTubers that includes *Inmendham*, likely the only non-retard) that I've seen expound this extreme form of antinatalism is the author David Benatar, who also happens to be an advocate of the corporal punishment of children and routine male circumcision (wait... what!?).
There is a crap-load of footage that shows *animals* suffering. There is no logical reason to give animals preference for survival over humans just because humans make them suffer like crazy.
When it comes down to a "philosophy" (*cough* emotional preference dependent on the highly dubious hedonistic premise *cough*) it all comes down to enforcement. If anything like this comes to pass, it will be because of violence, not voluntary procedures. Then again, I'm not against using violence (government policy) to enforce soft anti-natalism in regions where the population density makes life suck for damn near everybody.
However, if I am living in a first world country that doesn't suffer from immediate overpopulation and resource depletion problems; then I will have sexual intercourse when I want to do so, with or without contraceptive techniques.
The proposed anti-natalism here is the most extreme form: to bring a slow end to human life altogether by completely inhibiting reproduction. This is strange, since most anti-natalists are in favor of this ideology not to bring a "graceful end" to the human species, but to *improve conditions* with the solving of problems such as overpopulation, famine, and depletion of non-renewable resources. The only academic philosopher (and, since I've only found him and a group of YouTubers that includes *Inmendham*, likely the only non-retard) that I've seen expound this extreme form of antinatalism is the author David Benatar, who also happens to be an advocate of the corporal punishment of children and routine male circumcision (wait... what!?).
There is a crap-load of footage that shows *animals* suffering. There is no logical reason to give animals preference for survival over humans just because humans make them suffer like crazy.
When it comes down to a "philosophy" (*cough* emotional preference dependent on the highly dubious hedonistic premise *cough*) it all comes down to enforcement. If anything like this comes to pass, it will be because of violence, not voluntary procedures. Then again, I'm not against using violence (government policy) to enforce soft anti-natalism in regions where the population density makes life suck for damn near everybody.
However, if I am living in a first world country that doesn't suffer from immediate overpopulation and resource depletion problems; then I will have sexual intercourse when I want to do so, with or without contraceptive techniques.
Welshidiot
New Member
As far as I understand, antinatalism in it's most extreme form also toys with the idea of sterilising all life on the planet, as life itself is inevitably filled with "suffering".
To me it sounds like antinatalists apply an extreme form of Buddhist philosophy to the problems of social justice and population control. IMO they then convince themselves that the wholly subjective conclusion they draw from that application, is actually objective.
To me it sounds like antinatalists apply an extreme form of Buddhist philosophy to the problems of social justice and population control. IMO they then convince themselves that the wholly subjective conclusion they draw from that application, is actually objective.
Welshidiot
New Member
Which guy? There are a number of people in the video, which one are you referring to?Case said:
Welshidiot
New Member
Welshidiot said:
Why are you answering for Case? Did he send his response to you in a PM, and ask you to pass it on?ohcac said: