Having kids is immoral

[buddhistking]

Anti-natalism is the only truth of this world

Denying is only cope

WE yes YOU and ME would have all been better off if we were never born in the first place and it would be selfish/immoral of us to have kids of our own

 

[Elf]

Anti-natalism is the only truth of this world

Denying is only cope

WE yes YOU and ME would have all been better off if we weren't born and it would be selfish/immoral of us to have kids of our own

Extremely retarded take

 

[buddhistking]

Extremely retarded take

Explain how?

 

[JasGews69x]

Ok thats just your opinion

 

[buddhistking]

Ok thats just your opinion

Based on objective fact

 

[Elf]

Explain how?

If you’re ungrateful for your life doesn’t mean we all are.

 

[Elf]

Based on objective fact

No, its based on your skewed vision on life.

 

[perculezz]

only if ur poor or extremely ugly or deformed

 

[buddhistking]

If you’re ungrateful for your life doesn’t mean we all are.

It's not about being "greatful" or "ungreatful", you can be greatful for a pile of shit, it doesn't mean it's not a pile of shit, some kid in a third world country may be greatful for a bowl of rice and treat it like it's diamonds and gold, but that doesn't mean that the bowl of rice is actually valuable

 

[Elf]

It's not about being "greatful" or "ungreatful", you can be greatful for a pile of shit, it doesn't mean it's not a pile of shit, some kid in a third world country may be greatful for a bowl of rice and treat it like it's diamonds and gold, but that doesn't mean that the bowl of rice is actually valuable

Ok, explain how do you quantify the value of life itself

 

[buddhistking]

No, its based on your skewed vision on life.

only if ur poor or extremely ugly or deformed

All humans on this planet suffer and die, literally that is their destiny of all of them, including chad or stacy or whatever you want, humans get at best a life mixed with suffering and pleasure, which does not justify bringing someone new into this world, not to mention that 90% of humans do not even reach a level of a mix between pleasure and suffering, for most of them it's only suffering and not just for some deformed guy

 

[perculezz]

All humans on this planet suffer and die, literally that is their destiny of all of them, including chad or stacy or whatever you want, humans get at best a life mixed with suffering and pleasure, which does not justify bringing someone new into this world, not to mention that 90% of humans do not even reach a level of a mix between pleasure and suffering, for most of them it's only suffering and not just for some deformed guy

dnr

 

[car12345]

Anti-natalism is the only truth of this world

Denying is only cope

WE yes YOU and ME would have all been better off if we were never born in the first place and it would be selfish/immoral of us to have kids of our own

i want to create as many kids as possible with the most subhuman foid ever so that they all go ER and all foids go extinct and this shitty species finally goes extinct

 

[Elf]

All humans on this planet suffer and die, literally that is their destiny of all of them, including chad or stacy or whatever you want, humans get at best a life mixed with suffering and pleasure, which does not justify bringing someone new into this world, not to mention that 90% of humans do not even reach a level of a mix between pleasure and suffering, for most of them it's only suffering and not just for some deformed guy

If this was truly the case why is it in our instinct to reproduce ? And do not say this is an appeal to nature fallacy.

 

[buddhistking]

Ok, explain how do you quantify the value of life itself

If you relate it to the alternative aka non-existence (or never being born) then life always comes up short, because you never suffer if you are never born and you are guaranteed to suffer if you are born

 

[buddhistking]

If this was truly the case why is it in our instinct to reproduce ? And do not say this is an appeal to nature fallacy.

Blud its the same as any other animal, humans are not special, you are put on the earth to survive and reproduce, that doesn't mean it's morally right to do so (reproduce), the universe doesn't care about morals jfl

 

[Elf]

Blud its the same as any other animal, humans are not special, you are put on the earth to survive and reproduce, that doesn't mean it's morally right to do so (reproduce), the universe doesn't care about morals jfl

Morality is something you choose to believe in or are indoctrinated with.

 

[buddhistking]

Morality is something you choose to believe in or are indoctrinated with.

If you don't care about morals that's another thing, but trying to fool yourself like most people do in that you are having kids out of kindness of giving them the "gift of life" is huffing copium

 

[Elf]

If you relate it to the alternative aka non-existence (or never being born) then life always comes up short, because you never suffer if you are never born and you are guaranteed to suffer if you are born

So you say you would rather be nothing than take the chance of being something.

 

[SplashJuice]

Yup I've seen this philosophical stance. We are addicted to life yet we suffer so much from it and continue to procreate because we have to cope in some way or another. The only way to fix this is to never have children.

 

[buddhistking]

So you say you would rather be nothing than take the chance of being something.

1. The chance is small, most people never do anything significant in their lives at all

2. Even if you do become something, you will lose it all and go back to being nothing anyways when you die and ppl will forget about you and it would be like you weren't born in the first place, and don't talk about Albert Einstein or guys like that, these are a few people out of the billions that were born

 

[Elf]

If you don't care about morals that's another thing, but trying to fool yourself like most people do in that you are having kids out of kindness of giving them the "gift of life" is huffing copium

Okay, let’s say we dont use the “gift of life” and I do it for my own pleasure and satisfaction you’d say that I would do exactly what you said initially. But then the argument comes, NOT having kids is also selfish because it satisfies your own desires so it is infact not a selfless act.

 

[buddhistking]

Yup I've seen this philosophical stance. We are addicted to life yet we suffer so much from it and continue to procreate because we have to cope in some way or another. The only way to fix this is to never have children.

The worst part is we put this kind of morality on procreation like it's a good thing or morally noble to be a parent when in reality it's probably one of the most if not the most immoral things you can do

 

[SplashJuice]

Most people that have children have them for a mix of several reasons:

1) Cultural or religious dogma; because everyone else is doing it
2) Purpose in their older years
3) Curbing loneliness
4) Vanity (legacy)
5) A source of income for their later years
6) accidents/boredom

reasons are all over the place. economic conditions made it extremely hard to have a lot of children , the population is shrinking slowly .

 

[Blue Steel]

Keep LDARing boyo while the rest of us slay pussy

 

[buddhistking]

Okay, let’s say we dont use the “gift of life” and I do it for my own pleasure and satisfaction you’d say that I would do exactly what you said initially. But then the argument comes, NOT having kids is also selfish because it satisfies your own desires so it is infact not a selfless act.

It actually hurts your desires, because all humans are biologically wired to reproduce, most ppl who die childless are seen as losers and even your body and mental state will suffer naturally from not following your biological goal

You suffer from not reproducing, no way is it not selfless

 

[StyIix]

 

[buddhistking]

Keep LDARing boyo while the rest of us slay pussy

Retard babble that is irrelevant to the points I am making

 

[Blue Steel]

Retard babble that is irrelevant to the points I am making

Your “point” is irrelevant in the first place as it only applies to you

 

[StyIix]

Retard babble that is irrelevant to the points I am making

 

[GonorrhoeaGobbler]

you won't be happy we are bound to our nature, philosophie is cope in some aspects

 

[2MG]

Anti-natalism is the only truth of this world

Denying is only cope

WE yes YOU and ME would have all been better off if we were never born in the first place and it would be selfish/immoral of us to have kids of our own

Not to versed on this stance but wouldn’t denying the state of life to a being more morally unjust? It’s a selfish position not allowing said being the opportunity to choose for itself when it’s older. then you atleast give them the opportunity to stay alive or rope.

 

[buddhistking]

Your “point” is irrelevant in the first place as it only applies to you

Applies to all humans

you won't be happy we are bound to our nature, philosophie is cope in some aspects

View attachment 4460372

It's not about being happy though, it's about self-sacrifice in the aim of not putting someone else through this brutal life in a terrible world

 

[buddhistking]

Not to versed on this stance but wouldn’t denying the state of life to a being more morally unjust? It’s a selfish position not allowing said being the opportunity to choose for itself when it’s older. then you atleast give them the opportunity to stay alive or rope.

Roping is not the same thing as never being born because people suffer when they rope, people don't suffer when they are never born cus they never want to be born, we force them to be born

So I'm not denying my potential kid anything if he/she is not born, there is no harm, but if I have a kid and he/she ropes then I am doing them a great harm

 

[DarkLoner94]

Agreed i see it as quite selfish to bring kids into this sphere of hell.

 

[2MG]

I have a question for you do you believe you can place an objective moral standard on things that aren’t existing? Not having kids can’t be objectively a moral good because something has to be there in the first place for a judgment of morality?

 

[buddhistking]

Agreed i see it as quite selfish to bring kids into this sphere of hell.

 

[buddhistking]

I have a question for you do you believe you can place an objective moral standard on things that aren’t existing? Not having kids can’t be objectively a moral good because something has to be there in the first place for a judgment of morality?

Think about it like this, its morally good to not build a bomb or not drive drunk or not steal etc, even if the result is nothing happening in its place

Choosing to not create a person avoids harm and risk, that doesnt mean it was necessarily good for the non-existent person to not exist, it means the other option would be for an existing person to suffer, which would be bad

 

[2MG]

So essentially the morality is being placed on the action rather then the theoretical person?

 

[1966Ford]

Only Chads and Stacys kids matter in this world

 

[buddhistking]

So essentially the morality is being placed on the action rather then the theoretical person?

Yes the act of procreating itself is immoral because anti-natalism is focusing on life in this world, not just a hypothetical life of a potential kid, so it also applies to animals and such, but animals dont have the iq to think about this so only humans can be antinatalist

 

[buddhistking]

Only Chads and Stacys kids matter in this world

Cope not even them

 

[nsk4ll]

Only Chads and Stacys kids matter in this world

 

[wannacry]

according to shopenhauercuck maybe

 

[wannacry]

you won't be happy we are bound to our nature, philosophie is cope in some aspects

View attachment 4460372

philosophy is cope when it comes to dualist philosophies (like platonism or cartesianism) or things based on slave morality like stoicism, christianity or buddhism

 

[buddhistking]

according to shopenhauercuck maybe

philosophy is cope when it comes to dualist philosophies (like platonism or cartesianism) or things based on slave morality like stoicism, christianity or buddhism

Greycel ramblings

Why is philosophy and Buddhism cope?

 

[wannacry]

Greycel ramblings

Why is philosophy and Buddhism cope?

when you can't get or become what you want then you start to cope that you actually don't need it

 

[buddhistking]

when you can't get or become what you want then you start to cope that you actually don't need it

But does that make it not true, like that you do need it?

That's the difference between wanting and needing, so its still the truth

Plus Buddhism argues that even when you get what you want ur still not happy and you still suffer

It's not about if you want shit and don't get it that makes you suffer it's even when you get what you want you still suffer

 

[wannacry]

But does that make it not true, like that you do need it?

That's the difference between wanting and needing, so its still the truth

you just changed the word, the meaning is the same, at least in this context.
and buddhism is not the truth, every dualist philosophy is propaganda including buddhism, if there's an independent from body soul then how does the soul controls the material body, soul has to be material too in this case but it's impossible.

Plus Buddhism argues that even when you get what you want ur still not happy and you still suffer

It's not about if you want shit and don't get it that makes you suffer it's even when you get what you want you still suffer

suffering is not bad

 

[buddhistking]

you just changed the word, the meaning is the same, at least in this context.
and buddhism is not the truth, every dualist philosophy is propaganda including buddhism, if there's an independent from body soul then how does the soul controls the material body, soul has to be material too in this case but it's impossible.

You have clearly done no research at all, Buddhism is the biggest rejection of a soul and all that shit, ur speaking of Christianity and Islam and Hinduism

Buddhism has consciousness, but that's nothing like a spirit or a soul

suffering is not bad