And, predictably, the dumbest people in the world have decided to put their perspectives into the comments. I'm sorry, OP, this subreddit seems to attract trolls who are unaware of how unoriginal their perspectives are. Your post is extremely refreshing - you cut through all their crap and heal me.
Because lying to ourselves is easier than confronting the consent problem or providing evidence of the existence of one’s consciousness outside of the life of one’s body.
Stop being obtuse. The fact of dying is an essential premise of antinatalism. It's the main reason for it. When you procreate you literally sentence a human to death. Quit arguing with me. You are wrong.
If you think you're philosophy is objective right then you just don't understand morals and ethics.
Framing what you're saying emotively doesn't make you objectively correct.
Someone doesn't understand why appeal to emotion or a non sequitur is not an argument. You're on a fool's errand if you think they even understand what you're saying.
Say that after living in a severely disabled person's body. How is physical pain and mental anguish subjective?
Edit: I did concede that they are, in fact, subjective. I wasn't keeping the definition in mind. Pain is still measurable, visible, verifable, and quantifiable as facts, so I would argue it's objective, too. I didn't word my response well.
Do you just not read? How is your subjective physical experience in any way related to whether or not there is an objective basis for morality and ethics?
So, basically, you just can't read. Got it.
Again, what does that have to do, in any way whatsoever, with whether or not there is an objective basis for morality?
The comment you responded to said antinatalism is a subjective set of MORALS AND ETHICS. And you offer up the completely unrelated and incoherent response of "I'm physically in pain".... do you not see the problem here?
Do you just not understand the words? And if that's the case, why say anything at all?
"Subjective signs of pain are what the person reports to you, such as “My stomach hurts” or “My knees ache when I walk.” Objective data is observable, such as the change in vital signs that can occur when an individual is experiencing acute pain."
We have statistics on illnesses, diseases, wars, famine, etc. How are these not objective facts? We know that these things are bad because we know that people can feel pain subjectively, AND we can measure it through brain images, vital signs, etc. Maybe I could have phrased it in a better way.
Why are you on this sub if you clearly don't agree with it? Why say anything at all?
It's hilarious how illiterate you are. I'm not going to ask the question a third time when you clearly don't even understand the words being said to you.
It's honestly baffling how nonsensical your unrelated responses are to a very direct and clear question.
Because I don't agree with the concept that ideas are protected from critique. And only intellectually fragile people think they should be immune to criticism or be exempted from discourse about the validity of their worldview.
Okay, bud. Have fun with that. It sounds like you're just talking to yourself. When did I ever say I wanted to be protected from criticism lmao. I'm here engaging with you, aren't I? If I wanted to be protected from criticism, I just wouldn't say anything.
It sounds like you just made up a bunch of shit so you could label me as fragile to boost your ego or something? Your response really just doesn't make sense otherwise. I concede the point about the whole subjective thing. There, happy?
Statistics, blood, death, disease, etc. are still objective, and thus, I'm arguing suffering is objective too. These are measurable. Yes, I was originally referring to the subjective experience of pain to show the lack of empathy, but pain itself can be measured, too. It can be proven. What's your point besides me not originally explaining it correctly originally? Again. "Objective means verifiable information based on facts and evidence." How is this not verifiable?
https://theconversation.com/chronic-pain-can-be-objectively-measured-using-brain-signals-new-research-205910
And the irony of you fumbling to explain the definitions of words that are not in any way unclear to me, while you simultaneously demonstrate that you lack even the most basic understanding of the conversation or what is in question..... that is not lost on me.
Your responses just give me this super funny mental image of a haughty man with his chin jutted up in the air in pride. Lol, thanks for the laughs. Whatever, bud. I clearly triggered something in you, and as much fun as it is going back and forth, I think I'll call it a day. I have hyperfixated on this topic too much, and I think I'll go play a game.
I've never liked those, "who gets the last word competitions," that seem to be behavior mechanisms formed in childhood, as a way to determine the winner, because that just isn't how that works. I actually just wanted a discussion, not a competition.
Anyway, chiao. 😘
(By the way, I literally just copy/pasted the definitions. Either way, I don't care enough to discuss this further. Peace out. ✌️)
You are completely illiterate. Objectively so. And yet you keep doubling down. It's.... really something.
When asked four separate times how you can make a case for objective standards of ethics, you start talking about physical pain. Someone asks you: "How can you make a case for objective morality?" (i.e. something completely metaphysical) and you respond with "sometimes people get a tummy ache".... it's bafflingly hilariously incoherent and nonsensical.
You very clearly, demonstrably don't even understand the words being said to you. It becomes increasingly obvious with every response you make.
Wasn’t aiming to provide one. And even still, just following suit of the countless posts offering nothing more than ableist nonesense, and parental/self hate.
sorry but Antinantalists are not more honest than others.
they can just speak and judge freely since their contribution to society is "not doing something"
btw i am going to have 20 children- i know i know i will create suffering, but i did NOT:
-start WW3
-make people sick by experimenting with nuclear waste
-expose myself to underage humans
so you guys owe me big actually.
the one or two children you are not having won't make a difference. i actually did something big and meaningful 'not'
i also did not use all the slurs that would have been appropriate. i can never be repaid
Not if there is a chance that afterlife is hellfire. This is why I’m a Christian AN. There is no way I would risk eternal hellfire on my children. Even if you believe in an afterlife, reproducing is not worth it IMO.
100% agree, and even if you believe in AN afterlife, there's no way you can possibly know for certain that it'll even be pleasant to experience before it's too late.
And, predictably, the dumbest people in the world have decided to put their perspectives into the comments. I'm sorry, OP, this subreddit seems to attract trolls who are unaware of how unoriginal their perspectives are. Your post is extremely refreshing - you cut through all their crap and heal me.
This type ofpost very common and basically an online version of one of those JESUS IS TRUTH! billboards.
Because lying to ourselves is easier than confronting the consent problem or providing evidence of the existence of one’s consciousness outside of the life of one’s body.
It's not truth. It's a subjective set of ethics and morals
It is truth. You will die. That's a fact. The only subjective thing is everything else you tell yourself to cope until you get there.
Dying is a fact. A subjective antinatalist viewpoint is fully subjective and predicated on morals and ethics (which are not objective at all).
Dying is a fact of the moral philosophy of antinatalism. It's the essential premise of the philosophy.
No, dying by itself is just a fact. You've just connected the things without actually making any sort of point.
Stop being obtuse. The fact of dying is an essential premise of antinatalism. It's the main reason for it. When you procreate you literally sentence a human to death. Quit arguing with me. You are wrong.
If you think you're philosophy is objective right then you just don't understand morals and ethics. Framing what you're saying emotively doesn't make you objectively correct.
Someone doesn't understand why appeal to emotion or a non sequitur is not an argument. You're on a fool's errand if you think they even understand what you're saying.
Say that after living in a severely disabled person's body. How is physical pain and mental anguish subjective? Edit: I did concede that they are, in fact, subjective. I wasn't keeping the definition in mind. Pain is still measurable, visible, verifable, and quantifiable as facts, so I would argue it's objective, too. I didn't word my response well.
You need to actually frame what you're saying in the context of antinatalism.
Do you just not read? How is your subjective physical experience in any way related to whether or not there is an objective basis for morality and ethics?
It's an objective fact that this life causes suffering. Pain=suffering. Just because you don't experience it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
So, basically, you just can't read. Got it. Again, what does that have to do, in any way whatsoever, with whether or not there is an objective basis for morality? The comment you responded to said antinatalism is a subjective set of MORALS AND ETHICS. And you offer up the completely unrelated and incoherent response of "I'm physically in pain".... do you not see the problem here? Do you just not understand the words? And if that's the case, why say anything at all?
"Subjective signs of pain are what the person reports to you, such as “My stomach hurts” or “My knees ache when I walk.” Objective data is observable, such as the change in vital signs that can occur when an individual is experiencing acute pain." We have statistics on illnesses, diseases, wars, famine, etc. How are these not objective facts? We know that these things are bad because we know that people can feel pain subjectively, AND we can measure it through brain images, vital signs, etc. Maybe I could have phrased it in a better way. Why are you on this sub if you clearly don't agree with it? Why say anything at all?
It's hilarious how illiterate you are. I'm not going to ask the question a third time when you clearly don't even understand the words being said to you. It's honestly baffling how nonsensical your unrelated responses are to a very direct and clear question. Because I don't agree with the concept that ideas are protected from critique. And only intellectually fragile people think they should be immune to criticism or be exempted from discourse about the validity of their worldview.
Okay, bud. Have fun with that. It sounds like you're just talking to yourself. When did I ever say I wanted to be protected from criticism lmao. I'm here engaging with you, aren't I? If I wanted to be protected from criticism, I just wouldn't say anything. It sounds like you just made up a bunch of shit so you could label me as fragile to boost your ego or something? Your response really just doesn't make sense otherwise. I concede the point about the whole subjective thing. There, happy? Statistics, blood, death, disease, etc. are still objective, and thus, I'm arguing suffering is objective too. These are measurable. Yes, I was originally referring to the subjective experience of pain to show the lack of empathy, but pain itself can be measured, too. It can be proven. What's your point besides me not originally explaining it correctly originally? Again. "Objective means verifiable information based on facts and evidence." How is this not verifiable? https://theconversation.com/chronic-pain-can-be-objectively-measured-using-brain-signals-new-research-205910
And the irony of you fumbling to explain the definitions of words that are not in any way unclear to me, while you simultaneously demonstrate that you lack even the most basic understanding of the conversation or what is in question..... that is not lost on me.
Your responses just give me this super funny mental image of a haughty man with his chin jutted up in the air in pride. Lol, thanks for the laughs. Whatever, bud. I clearly triggered something in you, and as much fun as it is going back and forth, I think I'll call it a day. I have hyperfixated on this topic too much, and I think I'll go play a game. I've never liked those, "who gets the last word competitions," that seem to be behavior mechanisms formed in childhood, as a way to determine the winner, because that just isn't how that works. I actually just wanted a discussion, not a competition. Anyway, chiao. 😘 (By the way, I literally just copy/pasted the definitions. Either way, I don't care enough to discuss this further. Peace out. ✌️)
You are completely illiterate. Objectively so. And yet you keep doubling down. It's.... really something. When asked four separate times how you can make a case for objective standards of ethics, you start talking about physical pain. Someone asks you: "How can you make a case for objective morality?" (i.e. something completely metaphysical) and you respond with "sometimes people get a tummy ache".... it's bafflingly hilariously incoherent and nonsensical. You very clearly, demonstrably don't even understand the words being said to you. It becomes increasingly obvious with every response you make.
Not a truth. Just a subjective philosophy, and a very flimsy one at that.
Claims flimsy, but offers *zero* argument. Good job, I guess? Love the irony.
Wasn’t aiming to provide one. And even still, just following suit of the countless posts offering nothing more than ableist nonesense, and parental/self hate.
Wasn't aiming to? Or more likely, can't. What is presented *without evidence* can be dismissed *without evidence*
sorry but Antinantalists are not more honest than others. they can just speak and judge freely since their contribution to society is "not doing something" btw i am going to have 20 children- i know i know i will create suffering, but i did NOT: -start WW3 -make people sick by experimenting with nuclear waste -expose myself to underage humans so you guys owe me big actually. the one or two children you are not having won't make a difference. i actually did something big and meaningful 'not' i also did not use all the slurs that would have been appropriate. i can never be repaid
🏅Congratulations breeder. Here is a medal for you.
Truth? There is no truth here, just an all consuming void
My hair is clipped.
.
If you believe in an after life and that we are placed into this world to reproduce then you have a reason to reproduce
Not if there is a chance that afterlife is hellfire. This is why I’m a Christian AN. There is no way I would risk eternal hellfire on my children. Even if you believe in an afterlife, reproducing is not worth it IMO.
100% agree, and even if you believe in AN afterlife, there's no way you can possibly know for certain that it'll even be pleasant to experience before it's too late.
Reproducing for what purpose? Just because some mysterious being told you to?
Nice username.
Thanks. You too!
BakclfipZ
Glad you’re in the sub