RE:::: why Anti-natalism is no solution [Roenazarrek]

[icwutudidtharlulz]

*puts gun to head*

[ryette]

Wonderful video, enjoyed it quite a bit. Agree with your closing argument; humanity seems to be obsessed with their own existence. As you said, the universe wouldn't notice if humanity winked out, yet there seems to be this pervading idea that it would be some kind of grand tragedy. I've argued many times with my partner over procreation, and I don't see the point. Why would you bring a child into the world, especially knowing they'll suffer the same diseases/existence you did? Just adopt.

[BobMcCob]

Anti-natalism is irrational. All joy and love would end without more humans, and only through human achievement can suffering end. By killing humanity you destroy all positive feeling as well. Its amazingly weak to want all human life to end because of the negative aspects of experience. You realize how amazingly easy and painless a human life is then compared to a hundred years ago? Can you imagine what it will be in a few hundred more?

[xd1rtx]

life does scratch a universal itch, as sagan said, life is a way for the universe to know itself, life is the consciousness of the universe, life is the unnecessary component that makes the universe a more complete system,,,,, not extremely relevant to the antinatalism debate,,, 3435 was priceless,,, aahhhh, roenassarek is forgetting that fucking is fun, and thats why society would not crumble under laws that promote antinatalism,,,

[TehHermgirl]

When you started mentioning "7 times the food, 7 times the electricity," and how everything is cheaper, I got a vision of a worldwide going out of business sale...I've helped close down a couple of going out of business stores, so it was kinda funny.

[longcatisloooooong]

Nice video as usual Gary. Much love and respect.

[Qntkka]

I don't understand all of the anger, or even the controversy over this subject. Natalists impose life that will eventually die, returning to oblivion. Anti-natalists will deny the imposition of life by refusing to procreate, thus leaving potential life in a state of oblivion. If oblivion is the common end in both philosophies, and all imposed suffering ends in oblivion, then it doesn't make much difference (if any) if you are pro or anti natalism.

[threeofwands]

I'm not getting the idea that the offensive part of birth is that it makes future corpses. There is nothing wrong with corpses - they are the same as the material universe prior to birth.

What is wrong with birth is that it produces beings that are horrified by corpses, and then must spend their days on a countdown to becoming a corpse while suffering the various other tragedies of existence. Absolutely unnecessary and avoidable.

[Qntkka]

@threeofwands I like your take on this, so I have to ask: If life is imposed, and then that life suffers only to die and be returned to oblivion, do you think that the life experience would be negated by it's ending and returning to oblivion? And, if that life comes to a complete ending, a total and utter non-sentient oblivion, does it matter whether life is imposed, or left in oblivion?

[Citigroup100]

We can state differences between humans and lobsters but there is a basic core I can get to that will show you how they are both pointless.

[Citigroup100]

But yeah people are just like the lobster. they are not made to do anything but survive and make copies. Think about it a lobster is totally unecessary. it like curls its abdomen and flys through the water so it can survive and reproduce. nothing more and people are the same,in the important sense, just not through the traditional OPINION of others.

[Citigroup100]

If there is reasonable control of the situation and the people will understand their mission is not to jack off because it feels good, I think it is permissible.

[Citigroup100]

And I stand by my position. We NEED some people to stay alive, because (for the following reason) they need to get more information about what is going on and see if there is some way to exploit it. However, I do agree it’s too currently too many people and too inefficient. I look for intelligent people to live for the purpose of studying the phenomenon. Fewer people who are smart should exist for that clear purpose. They should be euthanized instead of die naturally and so on and so forth...

[Citigroup100]

I don't think so. They have to know critical thinking or they are not "up to speed." If they understand that it might be enough. But understand critical thinking is beginning philosophy and a lot of the student support the watchmaker argument and dont see why its wrong until years after they are introduced to critical thinking.

[kileer7]

17:53 means that decisions we make today must be evaluated by their impact on generations to come. I'm sick of people pretending that isn't what Inmendham means.

[logicalabsolute]

@kileer7 yes but if that is the case you can cut this argument to two vicarious selves arguing about their future ,

Gary, doesn't want to be born again. i do want to be born again, it is an unresolvable argument because no one has "right" on their side

[kileer7]

@logicalabsolute The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster will have no impact on future generations, right?

[HeySusie1]

lol at the end :-P

[dreadflanders]

sorry for double post

[dreadflanders]

wow this guy really feels threatened by Antinatalists......so they are the "lower" forms of human that would never have a chance at a "good" life?

What a judgemental mother fucker.......last i heard although kings can afford to linger on longer both kings and pawns all wind up in the same box when the game ends.

so i suppose he sees himself as a "higher" form?

then why does Antinatalism bother him so? He doesnt like it when "lowly" opinions are popular? snob douche anyone?

[whatever133701]

why the flying cancer fuck won't your video's fucking stay in the list of new video's where is sub to.

[SycorTheosPhilos]

The good news is, there are only a few days left to this crappy year. The bad news? You have an entirely new year of shit coming towards us... yay! :/

[zionistslut]

@SycorTheosPhilos

the world is suppose to end on dec 21st

so maybe we'll all get our wish

[pawnstar3]

If someone is truly an antinatalist then they would end their lives. If not, they're a hypocrite. (I.E. - "life sucks so much that no one else should be brought into this world - oh, but i'll continue to live and go about my everyday existence")

[dreadflanders]

@pawnstar3 hey hindstein does ANTI- which means to be against NATALIST which means having babies sound anything like suicide which means to end ones life?

with your logic all religous people should kill themselves....i mean CHRISTians cant meet christ while still breathing so why keep breathing?

[pawnstar3]

@dreadflanders So let me get this straight - you don't want to end your own life, but you want to end ALL life of future generations. Do you not see the hypocrisy of that? And your Christian analogy doesn't work beause Christians don't want to end their current lives, regardless of their belief in an afterlife.

[BiodegradeableMan]

@pawnstar3 Remember millions of Christians practice birth control thus ending the lives of millions upon millions of potential human beings (and those individual lineages). You accept that simply because no-one will miss them. You place little value on individual life yet baulk at Gary's argument, that's illogical. What do you think about Christian couples who abort a baby due to financial reasons only to have another when their situation changes? Gary hypocritical? Come on......

[pawnstar3]

@BiodegradeableMan Christians CAN be incredibly hypocritical ( as can anyone that doesn't practice what they preach)- I'm with you on that -but my point is that the idea of antinatalism is very hypocritical if the antinatalist keeps living. Can you not see the hypocrisy in that?

[EquinoxOfTheGods]

@pawnstar3

How is it hypocritical? How is continuing to live the same as birthing?

Our lives have already started, we've established connections with other people. The non-existant has not.

[pawnstar3]

@EquinoxOfTheGods Because what the antinatalist is essentially saying is that life is filled with so much suffering that we shouldn't allow any more people to be brought into this world. So if you're choosing to not allow future generations the chance to live, then why should you yourself be allowed that chance?

[EquinoxOfTheGods]

@pawnstar3

Because I have already happened. The future generations do not exist yet and does not NEED a chance to do anything. Only once they have been created they deserve the same chances as me and everyone else. In a nutshell.

[FreeLongPig]

@pawnstar3 "So if you're choosing to not allow future generations the chance to live, then why should you yourself be allowed that chance?"

I know that humans are emotional creatures and most have a sense of "justness", but I'll ask anyway...

Does not wanting other beings to be born mean that someone shouldn't be alive? If the answer is yes, then why?

[pawnstar3]

@FreeLongPig I think you're missing the point. You're mindset is that because there is suffering in the world, let me play the role of martyr and put an end to the suffering. But there are millions upon millions of people who aren't suffering on a grand scale and want to be alive and want to see future generations have the same opportunity as they do.

[FreeLongPig]

@pawnstar3 Oh, so I'm missing the point lol.

You didn't answer my questions but I'm used to it so whatever.

[pawnstar3]

@FreeLongPig What did you ask me? I am losing track since I'm juggling multiple conversations right now. I would be happy to answer your question.

[BiodegradeableMan]

@pawnstar3 Gary has never advocated the killing of living human beings. If you suggest that by living whilst advocating antinatalism is hypocritical consider this. By not producing as many babies as possible are you not living whilst denying potenial humans of life?

[pawnstar3]

@BiodegradeableMan But Gary, like you, has the choice to live or not. Why not allow the unborn a chance as well? The suffering in this world is awful - I would never argue against that. But there are also things in this world that make life worth living. Everyone should have the right to make that decision for themselves - not to have it made by past generations. There's always an exit (suicide)

[EquinoxOfTheGods]

@pawnstar3

That exit is painful for the self, to drive oneself to it demands intense suffering. And after the fact, you have family and friends who suffer and will never truly get over it. To create someone and inevitably anker it with emotions to their family, and then say "you can just kill yourself if you really hate it", is idiotic and cruel.

[pawnstar3]

@EquinoxOfTheGods Do you wish you were never born?

[EquinoxOfTheGods]

@pawnstar3

Not sure, and I'm not sure it matters much. Now that I'm here, I'll try to do good. Not doing a terribly good job at that so far, though.

[pawnstar3]

@EquinoxOfTheGods But it does matter. Because what you're admitting is that even amongst the suffering you still would rather be alive. And that's how most people feel. so why do you think it's doing the right thing by putting an end to humanity?

[EquinoxOfTheGods]

@pawnstar3

I'm human, I have emotions and instincts that kind of skew my focus towards survival. Being rational means penetrating this veil. Most people FEEL like continuing their existence even through horrid pain, this does not change the fact that they are in a very negative state. You probably don't think it's alright to torture someone just as long as they still want to live.

Gary answers your questions in debt. Go watch more of his videos, cus I must sleep and work now :)

[pawnstar3]

@EquinoxOfTheGods And once people are born they will have these same survival instincts - what's wrong with that? Again, there is a simple question to ask here: Would most of the people in the world prefer if they weren't born? The answer is no. For the ones that wish to end their lives, they could. For some reason people here seem to treat a certain capital G entity (Gary) as if he's God. I'm an atheist - I think for myself and I respectfully disagree with you (and Gary).

[EquinoxOfTheGods]

@pawnstar3

You don't know this. Also, it's not about what they prefer. People have preferred all kinds of evil and delusional things throughout history. That many people prefer to have babies, antinatalists would argue, is one of those things.

I personally think Gary fights a good fight, and he cares about the truth of things. I respect that and I find his videos interesting, that's all. I see what you say claimed here and there, but I haven't seen these garyworshippers anywhere...

[pawnstar3]

@EquinoxOfTheGods I guarantee you if you polled every person in the world the vast majority would say they're glad they were born and had a chance at life. For every antinatalist you may get thousands of people who love their lives and enjoy living. I've only posted on a few of Gary's videos and so far at least once in each debate someone brings him up and defers to his videos instead of formuating their own opinions. I'm stating what i've encountered-that may not be the norm

[BiodegradeableMan]

@pawnstar3 You could argue that past generations have no right to impose life on a sentient entity. If you birth a child that dies a horrible slow death are you ok with that? As we can never predict whether a person will be happy with life or not the default must be no birthing. You want to presume life equals good and that's illogical and biased.

[pawnstar3]

@BiodegradeableMan Let me ask you this: Do you wish you were never born? Also, do you think most people would wish they were never born? If the answer is no to even just the second question (which I 100% think it would be) then antinatalism is a ridiculous proposition. Sure, there's suffering. But there's also pleasure in life, and you never know where you will wind up on that scale.

[BiodegradeableMan]

@pawnstar3 I was unborn for 14.7 billion years and can honestly say that had I never been born I would not be complaining, not a jot. So the answer is yes, I would prefer never to have existed. However once you are embroiled in the life experience your psychology (flawed by default) prevents objective and rational observation. Humans justify it to deny the brutal truth of decrepitude and eath.

[zionistslut]

@BiodegradeableMan you stupid, dumb bastard

[BiodegradeableMan]

@zionistslut Imagine if people responded to your comments with equally disgusting comments of their own, where would we be? You need to question the real reason for your angst and anger issues. Projecting in my direction will not profit you in the slightest.

[pawnstar3]

@BiodegradeableMan I think the people who value their lives far outweigh the ones who don't. Even the antinatalists on here refuse to say for certain that they wish they weren't alive right now or that they were never born. Someone could be getting burned alive right now but someone else may be walking down a red carpet at a movie premiere- that's the unfairness and full spectrum dynamic of life. But it's all there is.

[BiodegradeableMan]

@pawnstar3 "But it's all there is." So based on that premise your Red Carpet experience excuses the 3000 plus deaths of children today who could not get clean drinking water.

[pawnstar3]

@BiodegradeableMan No - life is inherently unfair. It's filled with incomprehensible suffering. But it's also filled with pleasure as well. Most people's lives exist somewhere in the middle. There are always extreme examples in either direction. Look, I've suffered a lot in my life. But I realized that through that suffering I've found strength in myself (not a higher power) - that love of the self is an amazing thing to have. If I lost that, I would check out.

[BiodegradeableMan]

@pawnstar3 Perhaps my love of those who will die needlessly every hour of every day in horrific pain and anguish colours my thinking. For me my love of myself cannot block out factual reality. Am I weak?

[pawnstar3]

@BiodegradeableMan Antinatalism is what's weak. So basically because there's suffering in the world, humanity should end. What about the people who do enjoy life or would enjoy life if they were to be born in the next generation? They shouldn't get that chance?

[BiodegradeableMan]

@pawnstar3 You know Gary has a valid argument when you see such a hue & cry waged against it. If Gary was talking rubbish would there be such an emotive reaction? The answer is no, Gary is forcing you to face a harsh and brutal reality something most people spend a lifetime running from. In essence he’s a party pooper, he bursts the ballon of delusion and romanticism and most would have him silenced for it.

[zionistslut]

@BiodegradeableMan

oh, i gotta give this a thumbs up. I'm so fucking impressed

[BiodegradeableMan]

@zionistslut If you could master your temper them you too could produce rational content.

[tornnyos]

@BiodegradeableMan Well said. I agree completely.

[jokskol]

@pawnstar3 Your pronatalist opinion and defense were created by the delusions that life programmed into you so you will unquestingly follow the path that every other mindless lifeform is walking to AKA being reduced to mass. Your opinion almost equals to that of a tyrant who wants everyone to participate in the war he has started.

[pawnstar3]

@jokskol And I can say that your antinatalist opinion is programmed and delusional etc. That argument doesn't hold up or have any merit. You want to end all of humanity and someone I'm the tyrant? HAHAHAHA

[jokskol]

@pawnstar3 So your only defense against antinatalism is your personal opinion, and that "laughing", i expected nothing more from a pronatalist such as you. You want to encourage people to participace in this silly carrot-on-a-stick chasing game. How about playing the game/war by urself only?

Haven't the courage for it? Too frightened of dying alone? To lazy to change ?Pronatalistsm is driven by fear only.

[pawnstar3]

@jokskol And your only defense of antinatalism is personal opinion - see how that logic works? I dont dichotomize people into pronatalist and antinatalist categories mainly because the antinatalist position has so few advocates. I don't even remotely know what your saying in the second paragraph - it makes zero sense.

[BiodegradeableMan]

@pawnstar3 A nonexistent person cannot be deprived or suffer. You are trying to make a case for persons as yet un-conceived. If we follow this maxim then we are all obligated to birth as much as possible. If you do not procreate to your full potential many humans will be denied life, correct? Do we really want to go down that pathetic road and impose a mass Catholicism on an already over populated planet?

[zionistslut]

@BiodegradeableMan

bi-guy, go depopulate starting with yourself

[BiodegradeableMan]

@zionistslut If you wish to make a cogent counter argument (assuming you have one)please make it. In the mean time try to refrain from these mindless insults. They expose an irrational and aggressive temperament that can only cause you social embarrassment.

[zionistslut]

@BiodegradeableMan  you stupid, dumb bastard

[BiodegradeableMan]

@zionistslut Good grief you really are unable to engage in rational discourse. What do you hope to accomplish with such baby talk?

[pawnstar3]

@BiodegradeableMan The point is not to have as many children as possible. You're going on the opposite ends of the spectrum. Attempting to prevent the human race from existing past this generation just because there is suffering in the world is an extreme and rather silly philosophy.

[zionistslut]

@BiodegradeableMan you'e still a stupid, dumb bastard

[BiodegradeableMan]

@zionistslut That is one rage filled comment. Now why not calm down and make a cogent counter argument as respectful protocol dictates.

[EquinoxOfTheGods]

@pawnstar3

One human life ends itself, families suffer.

All life ends, there is none to suffer.

[LostRituals]

Well in defence of the restart of human life... Given infinite time it's possible. But we still have as much reason to end our existence as the 'new self-conscious language monster' would have to end theirs.

[LostRituals]

My anti-natalism started with the realization that there really isn't anything to be afraid of in death (except reincarnation haha) but once you are born your attachments immediately start doing their work and you cling to whatever satisfaction you get from life so being killed immediately after birth or even at 5 years cannot be compared to non-existence. At that point you have already suffered more than when not having been born and yet are (often) unable to get rid of the addiction of life.

[LostRituals]

@LostRituals I mean't in the first sentence "non-existence" not the act of dying or death.

[raindog951]

Good luck Gary in kicking that bastard depression out the door. Onward into 2012 with a forced grin! At the very least it will be an 'interesting' year.

[threeofwands]

I was thinking of your father a bit over the Christmas day weekend ... I still love him quite a bit and think of him as a great logic teacher.

Cheers to you and good luck with "ZomIgod" or whatever her name is.

[kensho123456]

I don't agree with antinatalism as it does not go far enough.

[sorensofos]

@kensho123456 what?

[kensho123456]

@sorensofos It needs to be combined with euthenasia and the legalisation of suicide to speed up the process.

[JamieA3OZ]

Thumbs up! Great response as usual Gary. xoxo

[Tommy4216]

what if somebody sees more value in existing than not existing? there doesn't need to be any accomplishment

[CanadianSwine]

Gary new subscriber quick question if you have the time. I seen you have an efilist channel. What exactly is an efilist? To me it seems the same as the arguments on this channel.

[tdu13]

@CanadianSwine It's a channel that's supposed to make the argument more "presentable".

[SolomonKull]

@CanadianSwine

Efilism is working towards the extermination of all life on the planet. Antinatalism is working towards the prevention of creating life.

[sorensofos]

@SolomonKull where does the word efilism comes from? who coined it? what is efil?

[abutnotantisocial]

@sorensofos efil = life backwards and also evil with an f ;)