• Shawn
    12.6k
    Can one do otherwise when faced with the truth of meaninglessness? Existential nihilism is the stuff of horror stories - like a malicious spirit it'll haunt our thoughts until our deaths. Quite odd that the very reason for our angst - death/nonexistence - will also serve to liberate us from that angst.TheMadFool

    Don't die, then. Just philosophize. I would miss ya.
  • schopenhauer1
    10k
    You must be careful with your analogies. Most anyone would agree with you that such an infliction is bad, but consider another supposed example of inflicting harm for the greater good: childhood discipline. Of course it's the right thing to harm your child either indirectly by not giving them the treats they desire, or even by direct discipline (timeout, scolding, etc.). This indicates that there is a difference between your uncharitable example and mine, that difference being that in your example, you are giving them sickness just to alleviate them from the sickness you gave them. It's a reversal. In the case of childhood discipline, your aren't putting them in time out just to take them out, rather you are putting them there to, well, discipline, shape up their behavior so that they may lead better, ethical lives in the future.QuixoticAgnostic

    You can argue the child is not a full adult, and is obligatory once born to enact this. Once, born harm may be justified in non-adults, but the fact the deficit is created in the first place would then itself not be justified.

    This is the difference in perspective, and I think the unspoken assumption that anti-natalists have that life is suffering. To give birth is to give them the illness of life, only to reverse that illness as best we can. But I don't think life is inherently suffering. Yes, life is fundamentally about avoiding pain, but that doesn't mean life is pain.QuixoticAgnostic

    It really works either way as to whether you believe in necessary forms of suffering (it is unavoidable), or contingent (it is practically unavoidable through circumstances of situation, cause and effect).

    1. Is it possible that the good of existing pleasure outweighs the good of non-existent pain?
    2. If life was inherently pleasurable, happy, and beneficial, with some pain and negativity, would you still agree that non-existence is better because there is no bad in non-existence, but still some bad in existence?
    QuixoticAgnostic

    I liken it to kidnapping someone in order for them to play a game you think they would mostly like. You smile as they play the game and start identifying with its obstacles and challenges to overcome. Is that justified? It can also be a like a slave who identifies with their situation even though they are being exploited. Is their own evaluation correct, just because its their own evaluation? I don't think so in both cases. Creating deficits so people can overcome them seems at best, a misjudgment.

    So in this actual world, no I don't think it is the case that good outweighs the good of non-existent pain. But you know what? The collateral damage if I'm wrong is zilch, nothing, no one gets harmed. The collateral damage to your scenario is much more- someone definitely will get harmed. I do think there is an odd paternalistic vibe to these optimistic philosophies. Somehow the structures of existence are inherently "good" for someone to experience. But on examination, this really makes no sense for someone who never existed. No one needs to experience happiness prior to birth. It is only after birth that happiness becomes something of a vague goal, and certainly good experiences are sought out concretely.

    Certainly we do not live in a utopia, but I guess if that was the reality, than I would be fine with procreation. I don't think this would even be a discussion, if that were the case though. However, that is not the current situation.
  • TheMadFool
    13.8k
    Don't die, then. Just philosophize. I would miss ya.Shawn

    :smile: I'll try
  • Pinprick
    950
    Personally, I do not accept 1.
    I do not like pain, and not liking pain keeps me safe. Therefore pain is good.
    unenlightened

    If pain is good, then removing pain would be bad, right? Isn’t what is actually good the fact that we seek to alleviate pain? That act is what keeps us alive, not pain.
12Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.