I dont get it. So all pleasure, love, happiness is simply a chemical reaction without any intrinsic moral good or purpose, but somehow suffering is more real than this? Look, if all everything is is a pile of microscopic billiard balls knocking into eachother then whats the difference between billiard balls in the shape of suffering and billiard balls in the shape of contentment? I know you would just say "fucking prick, idiot, cunt" but your argument, at least this one, is self defeating.
The 5th word that will make a difference in the equation is elimination. It becomes obvious that the cycle of consumption, reproduction, cannibalism and addiction must be reigned in. Human beings are the only life form with even a glimmer of hope of being able to accomplish that.
its bad enough. for me anyway. i've passed 6 kidney stones in the last year and a half. last one took me a month to pass it. it was 7 mm in diameter. i said fuck it and went to a urologist and got me on meds and changed my diet. more veggies, less meat.
I said nature was neutral, not balanced. Actually I agree with you about this issue, but you insist on mischaracterizing my position. And that has pissed me off.
if these things growing or occurring or what have you causes "collateral damage" somewhere in the process in some extremely convoluted manner that doesn't negate the fact that something the polar opposite from suffering has also occurred. it's your general situation, man... i've been there for the last 10 years; it erodes your memories of what genuine happiness and reduces ones ability to extrapolate anything positive -- from anything. there's a balnce, u've just become largely blind to it.
u've become a master of what's shitty and "why life sucks", etc. b/c u've been in a negative and constricting situation for an extended (perhaps 'very' extended) period of time. your general Q, "what's the justification for all this suffering?" indicates a kind of blindness to all the things around you that are the antithesis of such. things that grow (every single plant & other organism around your house) is engaged in the opposite; every instance of happiness, gratification, etc. is the oposit
Hey man. Been following your channel for a while. To be honest, the only answer I found is to live because I am alive. I didn't chose this, no one did. All I can do is adopt rather than reproduce, and try to live a life that has as little cause for shame as possible. No one promised that this would be worth the ride, it's all people convincing themselves it's worth it. I can handle this darkness because it's all I'm made to do, I have to. What do you think of that point of view?
If I recall, it was observing the life cycle of the parasitic insects which caused Darwin to lose or greatly question his faith in a god. They lay their larvae inside a host's body and then the larvae eat their way out, slowly consuming the organism from within.
Just think about the amount of sentient organisms that will suffer this year (a number we truly cannot comprehend), then multiply that by the hundreds of millions of years into the past, as well as the thousands/millions/billions of years into the future...
Gary, if you knew that the suffering in the universe would never come to an end, would you press the red button to end the universe? I wouldn't. I feel that the value of life is greater than the suffering. The experience that many people are living is worthwhile. Pointless, but worthwhile. Stupid, but worthwhile. And after death, any suffering doesn't even matter. We may as well plant our seeds because sex is the most anti-suffering moment that we can accomplish in this reality.
"I feel that the value of life is greater than the suffering."
Shouldn't it be about the truth instead of what we personally feel. What possible argument can be given to show that the suffering is justified by the existence of life; when there is no need for life to even exist/be perpetuated.
you are such a hypocrite inmendham you are a junky too and you want to live like the rest of us. animals arent bothered like we are by pain in the same way. sure in severe cases they may seek help. but i have had a cat that had a large part of his leg ripped off in a fight. and he wasnt even bothered by it. we are troubled by our pains because we are smart enough to think there is some way to remove the pain and in some cases this is true. in some
Nature is pretty brutal. Animals get eaten alive on a routine basis, and the default reaction we are all supposed to have is "well, that's nature". Or, "Let nature run it's course..." And we're then expected to believe that nature is a beautiful thing. Just because all the animals look alike and act alike, doesn't mean they don't feel the same physical and emotional terrors that we would feel if we were in the same situation.
@AndyMH182 I had this sadistic thought: when we send those intergalactic probes around the universe, why not make sure hose are infected with life. When they eventually get stuck on some planet this will start again.
i've viewed a couple of your vids w/interest, but the fact that you could plug such idiocy as the artificial toy crap made me lose some respect. Seriously, how could anyone make it through such nonsense?
@saaweeet If I wanted to call Gary a Nihilist or tell him to off himself, I would. But that's not debating, is it? Gary doesn't debate. He makes a video, and then insults everyone who disagrees with him. Maybe I should start "debating" like Gary.
Gary, you stupid fucking cunt. Why do you continue to make the same stupid fucktarded argument? If life is a pointless game that nobody can win, why do you still play? You stupid idiot.
I think Lorelela is trying to "psychology" you--no off L, if you read this. But the fact is those of us concerned with psychologies do so for a reason: our brains are geared towards it.
I think you on the other hand approach it as philosophy. Thus the miscommunication.
@fulishproductions Unfortunately it's not that simple. I am not simply a psychologist any more than Gary is simply a philosopher. To categorise anyone in such simple terms is unfortunately to create the means to fail to communicate, whatever the categorisation. I know once it gets to this point we probably won't get any further (this time).
@L, no. No person is simple, and I apologize if my rough yet direct comment made you think I was putting you in a box. I was not. (Coincidentally I'm not the only rough yet direct guy around ;P )
So then, what I meant to say was simply that I find immense value in this philosophy. The tiny pieces of paper in our wallets are, indeed, made of far too much blood. True--some of them may be made of hard work done by intelligent men and women--however, the bright red blood kind of stands out.
Suffering is not cumulative, two creatures suffering is not twice the suffering of one, any more than two happy people is actually more happiness. Pain is not some phantasmagorical energy that collects somewhere and festers. It’s a thought, an interpretation of electrochemical signals that exist only for the individual organism.
I don't think he ever said that suffering is cumulative in the way you described, just that (as you said with your happiness example) two organisms suffering is more suffering than one organism suffering (assuming the intensity of suffering is the same).
@TheMaleWithNoName Thoughts can only add up in the brain thinking them, they don’t exist independent of that brain. The “Global consciousness project” has been shown to be junk science, thoughts no matter how many brains are thinking them have no quantifiable affect or properties, therefore cannot “add up” to be more of anything quantifiable.
Suffering has value individually every human on the planet having a headache is still just one headache and less suffering than one person in agony.
Again, I'm not saying suffering "adds up" in the sense that two small headaches equal one normal headache. Just that, clearly, if ten people have headaches then that is more events/instances of headaches (suffering) than just two people with headaches. Thus it can be said that there are more headaches (suffering), with 'more' simply meaning more events/instances of.
I will accept “more instances” of something however, that’s just a descriptive and doesn’t mean more of something if that something is not real outside of each instance of it. Gary has used the work “multiply” which leads me to believe he thinks it does “add up.”
Gary: you always talk about the problems (cannivalism, consumption, reproduction, addiction). You do that on this channel. Then I suggest you make a video with solutions to this problems also on this channel. Concrete solutions, if you have them. Otherwise, people will continue making assumptions about your goals.
How can we fix this mess (don´t waste suffering) in your view? Just in one video. A long one if it´s necessary.
@TheMaleWithNoName So essentially your answer to suffering is death. I find it interesting that those with this opinion seem to remain steadfastly and often loudly alive.
@Loreleila How many times does everyone have to go over (he just did it in his LAST video) that human beings are part of a social fabric we cannot just extricate ourselves from. When I ran into Inmendham, I listened to his videos and I paid attention. It's very frustrating to see countless people apparently listen to him in a glazed over state letting his words just bounce off their brains and listen to their shallow knee jerk responses. I'm out of room.
@booboonation People failing to listen to the actual content of someones words is all too common sadly. We all do it to a degree since we all have our own blindspots. Including Gary. It's especially prevalent here however, where basic ideas are jumped on and run with without any true understanding of them, or of accusing others of being something they simply are not because it's easier than taking the time to listen.
@Loreleila ~ U can reply here ~ rather than hiding behind Ur videos ~ I've yet 2 c Gary pull an under-tatic like that~ & ~ no Ur were not being honest w/ Urself w/ Me ~ U were exploiting my comments posted to Ur video ~ for Ur - 0 sum game ~
@Loreleila " No, lying is not alright when convenient." allow Me 2 reply then ~ if U pose an issue to Me ~ which I didn't request ~ I should b allowd 2 answer & granted an complete & open conversation ~
"So essentially your answer to suffering is death."
That is quite a reckless and unfair way to put it.
In terms of suffering in civilisation, we can do many things not involving death to stop and prevent it. However that wasn't really the question; the question was about suffering in relation to the fundamental idea of life. As such, (for us) the solution to "consumption, reproduction, cannibalism, addiction" (i.e. ending suffering) is to cease procreating, which isn't death.
For the rest of the animal kingdom however, unfortunately it would have to be death, unless there is / would be some way to sterilize.
"seem to remain steadfastly and often loudly alive."
Not procreating =/= suicide. Killing yourself isn't going to end the suffering in the world. If anything, it's throwing away your only opportunity to reduce it.
@TheMaleWithNoName "Killing yourself isn't going to end the suffering in the world. If anything, it's throwing away your only opportunity to reduce it."
Absolutely. However, it doesn't seem you've thought this through. You appear to be suggesting the ultimate eradication of humanity by an enforced cessation of births. Aside from the fact no one will buy that, imagine over time the young become less and less and the old to suffer increasingly. Does that seem a good solution to you?
"You appear to be suggesting the ultimate eradication of humanity by an enforced cessation of births."
This is the second time you've put it in a reckless and unfair way. I never included the word enforced. Of course, in such a scenario where it has gained majority support, it may then be "enforced" onto the minority. However you did not preface with something like that, thus leading it to be reckless and unfair.
That does not negate the validity of it, and unfortunately I don't think there are any other solutions which would gain more support than this one.
"Does that seem a good solution to you?"
Clearly it's not perfect, but it's a small, short term loss to a big, long term gain. Unfortunately I don't think there are any other solutions which will create less suffering than this one.
@TheMaleWithNoName Not at all. I'm presenting you with just one of the possible manifestations of your suggestion. The trouble with many of these suggestions (not just yours) is that unless the various possibilites are explored in terms of how they're likely to play out it will not be seen what is actually viable and what isn't. To end human life because some of it hurts seems utterly illogical to me.
I have no problem with you exploring the solution, just that as I explained, including a presumptive addon without a qualifier or preface is quite reckless as it can imply something which isn't even being argued e.g. enforced without a majority.
"To end human life because some of it hurts seems utterly illogical to me."
That is an extraordinarily gross understatement. Do I really need to go through humanity's horrors (both past and present); the wars, poverty, disease, disasters. That's the notable, major events; then there's the just as hard suffering on the smaller scale. Not to mention all the suffering humanity imposes onto animals, which is probably more than humans endure themselves.
All for what, so that the pointlessness can be perpetuated? So that the non-existent can be needlessly brought into existence? Remember, this solution isn't to go out and "end human life", it's simply, in a way, to do nothing; to keep things the way they are, with the non-existent remaining non-existent.
@Loreleila I have a question, you seem to have a knee jerk reaction to the idea of extinction, have you questioned why you have this reaction? If so, I'm curious as to what the reason is.
So life has some sort of inherrent value that supercedes the negatives its mere existance creates in the form of suffering? I'm sorry, but I don't see that and I don't think it's a matter of perspectives either.
Just because life exists does not mean it "should",
@BeardedBill86 No knee jerk reation at all. Extinction will no doubt happen at some point, and my own will happen sooner than that of the human race (more than likely). It's a given. My problem with all this is that those who suggest human life should end never produce either a viable way this should happen, why it would be a genuinely useful idea or how the majority would ever be likely to buy it. It seems a lot of talk and very little action.
We are not God's, we are limited in our abilities and means.. but since the situation itself is not viable to begin with, the solution should merely produce as little suffering as possible.
As to how usefull it is.. well that depends entirely upon what you mean by usefull, it's usefull to stop a situation producing a disproportionately large negative with far less positive, no?
And ofcourse the majority wont buy it in our lifetimes, but having the philosophy out there..-
- (cont) is important in and of itself, it's a position that needs to be presented so that it can be given due consideration instead of not even entering into the equation.
@BeardedBill86 ~ why ~ Loreleila can b the reactionary flip~ so ~ expect knee jerk reactions ~ She tends to dismiss objective thought or refuses or fails to follow thru w/ her espoused ideas ~ U tell Me/Us ~ I don't get it ~
@Loreleila I'm also curious as to how you would react and view, in a hypothetical scenario, the knowledge that an Alien race far more advanced than us had a majority vetoed mass suicide plan enacted as opposed to enduring unknowable centuries of further existance before they might find a way to reduce suffering to acceptable levels, having concluded logically that the latter simply wasn't a justifiable or "viable" option.
@BeardedBill86 This is interesting. I used exactly the same argument on one of my videos where someone was arguing that sentience was what made life of worth, the only measurable factor in suffering, that therefore it was just fine to torture and kill animals who had less of it than us. I asked if aliens appeared with more sentience than us would it be ok for them to farm and kill us for food.
@Loreleila Simply having the word alien in your arguement doesn't really make it "exactly the same" since I was asking what your reaction would be to discovering that aliens had logically concluded the life experiment wasn't worth the time investment it would take them to fix it versus the cost.
Yours sounds more like an ethical arguement on the value of life and conciousness in its various forms.
@TheMaleWithNoName Overpopulation is only one of the problems Gary talks about. I was asking about the solutions he could give us for the whole picture.
Firstly, even if there isn't a solution, or the solution is not accepted, it is still worthwhile to identify and defend what the truth of our reality is.
Anyway, the solution (for human life at least) is quite simple and has been stated many many times; we simply need to stop needlessly reproducing. If we don't perpetuate the problem, then the problem won't exist.
After that there is only the animal life to take care of; and I use the word 'only' very loosely here.
If none if this matters, why even bother trying to reduce suffering? If life is completely pointless and going nowhere, then who cares? Why shouldn't I cause the most suffering possible? Seriously. Why even bother with YouTube videos? Why bother waking up in the morning? Why bother doing anything anywhere at all? With your logic, existing is pointless, so why bother with it?
@TheMusicShogun, why would the recognition that something is broken logically compel someone to walk away and leave it that way ? retorical question as you are blocked asshole.
@inmendham No that is not true, we are individuals like a republican, its not canabilism. Baby chickens experience closer to that of the graphics card in your computer than the sophisticated brain of a human baby that produces qualia.
@inmendham those killing factories we still have even at their peak right now do show how barbaric we are and the truth about reality if you have a clear view of whats going on. I think you can see the reality to some degree.
@inmendham peoples brains die out when they get older so they feel less emotional pain. For most life can be decent for some it is hell. Minimize pain increase hapiness utilitarianism. When I spent a month is jail there was soeone in there for 3 more years and he was aways so happy. I asked how he could be happy when he had to sit there for 3 fucking years. All the morons in jail just started insiting "you got to man" "you have to."
@inmendham The information that took billions of years is not even complex. hey bob hey mike wheres boby late again probably consumed alchohol with mike c last night we have to go to joes to meet mike 4.
@inmendham no no no insects don't feel anything. Again, look at the graphics card example. Insects are functional only. They do not have a dynamic core in their brain - no frontal brain mass, therefore no qualia. It is like your leg after it’s been injected full of anesthetic.
@inmendham no no no insects don't feel anything. Again, look at the graphics card example. Insects are functional only. They do not have a dynamic core in their brain no frontal brain mass, therefore no qualia. It is like your leg after it’s been injected full of anesthetic.
@TheMusicShogun ~ Gary has never implied an apathy 4 suffering ~ It's a basis for his philosophy ~ I'm pretty well neutral & usually won't sponsor error ~ no matter the party ~ His reaction 2 Ur comment ~ is understandable ~ may U'll b on probation like pier-ro ~ not certain about 2b & gratex though ~ he does have other channels ~ now U know ~ * cheers *
Don't get me wrong but you make fun of "phantasmic oracle people" and what not but yet you here sying that everything has to be measured in suffering...but according to who? And you tell us we have to justify ourselves the lives we lead but why should we be held to a standard that is also just man made in this case by you.
I hope I didn't sound insulting it's a honest question.
You don't 'have to' however if you consider yourself a rational and moral human being it makes sense to appreciate that suffering is effectively a unit of value (the only objective unit of value in my opinion), and therefore you shouldn't waste it. As for standards, if you reject the notion of an intelligent designer then all standards must necessarily be man-made since the universe has no brain and therefore no ability to impose standards.
It's truly sad that some ppl on here will deny the suffering of sentient animals that do not have the designation homo yet when confronted by a dying pet Dog or Cat will have it put down to end its suffering? Go figure.....
@TheSuicidalOptimist ~ why isn't pier-ro thoughtful like this ~ good pnts as always ~ humans R prized above all creatures ~ or sacred I suppose ~ that's why ~ I feel bettr @ night knowing ~ murder is a civil offense ~ not mosquito control :-)
I can't see it the same as you any more than you can the way I do. The difficulty for me here is the framework in which you view it is pretty cast iron and you ridicule when challenged. I have no idea how to get through to you and that doesn't make me (or you) stupid. But I'm not here to convince you of anything It would be great to reach a point of genuine understanding on all this but it does seem an impossibility. So what is your solution Gary? To this and to life.
@Loreleila , Just as I would not "agree to disagree" on a issue like rape or slavery, I will not concede your right to disagree until you earn it with something I can interrupt as a reasonable justification... saying life "just is" is maybe even less rational than saying God just is.
@inmendham Your logic seems as illogical as mine does to you. Why should the burden of proof be on me? I have as much right to disagree (or as little) as you do.
@Loreleila, you are essentially justifying the brutal rape of feeling life on earth for the glory of your trivial gluttony... what do you expect me to say "have a nice day" ? you are sadistic loons I can only hope to convert into merely masochistic idiots. As for our arguments being equally reason based and logical ...I will just point out that "that is what all the god nuts say"
@Loreleila, where is the evidence of an alternative interpretation? I ask how bad does it have to get? you answer "anything goes" As our God of nature and her crude forces are too sacred to be judged.
@inmendham How bad does it have to get before what? That you blow your brains out? Or that I admit it's all a crock of shit? I'm not saying anything goes. Have you listened to anything I said at all? Please don't put words in my mouth. You seem to see only suffering (other than in human babies, who are somehow exempt) and no more. I see other aspects of life as well as suffering and won't apologise for it. I've made it clear the more strategies for minimising suffering we have the better.
@Loreleila "Or that I admit it's all a crock of shit?" bingo... meaningful change will require this explicit and direct admission. The experiment is fundamentally broken ...putting makeup on the corpse will FIX nothing and will just amount to another stupid human ego trick.
@inmendham I'll happily admit the human 'civilisation' trick is broken, if indeed it was ever not, and breaking more all the while. You may mean more, but if we were to assume I fully agreed with you on that, what then would be your solution?
@OURZIONTUBE What are you saying "no" to, and how is what your theory is relelvant to these realities? It makes no difference if a god has left us or not. Why are you here if you refuse to listen to the video?
@OURZIONTUBE Why don't you listen to his arguments, and respond to his actual arguments. One is that the nature of biological life is suffering. The natural world suffers separate from us.
I'm only on two minutes and it's a fave already. I'll never forget that one time you pointed out that even if most of us were like elephant men with public drool fountains people would be justifying it because they're lost in their own addictive subjective addiction to sensation.
uh .. hmm .. as bad as a @loreleila dialogue ~ so ~ we haven't seen nothin' yet :)
TJae1 1 month ago
Comment removed
TJae1 1 month ago
I dont get it. So all pleasure, love, happiness is simply a chemical reaction without any intrinsic moral good or purpose, but somehow suffering is more real than this? Look, if all everything is is a pile of microscopic billiard balls knocking into eachother then whats the difference between billiard balls in the shape of suffering and billiard balls in the shape of contentment? I know you would just say "fucking prick, idiot, cunt" but your argument, at least this one, is self defeating.
htomerif 3 months ago
The 5th word that will make a difference in the equation is elimination. It becomes obvious that the cycle of consumption, reproduction, cannibalism and addiction must be reigned in. Human beings are the only life form with even a glimmer of hope of being able to accomplish that.
jollyradical 9 months ago
Brilliant analysis.
BayAreaLen 1 year ago
@BayAreaLen >>Your Perfectly Right,!! > I agree, totally & completely >>Len!!!!
7STONEMAN7 1 year ago
Comment removed
TJae1 1 year ago
Green Day - Working Class Hero Live U mite like it ~ cheers ~ dude
TJae1 1 year ago
11:25 rats chasin cheese till they bite each others legs off and just inchin along on thier bellies. LOL that would be fucked up
cydonianman 1 year ago
its bad enough. for me anyway. i've passed 6 kidney stones in the last year and a half. last one took me a month to pass it. it was 7 mm in diameter. i said fuck it and went to a urologist and got me on meds and changed my diet. more veggies, less meat.
cydonianman 1 year ago
@cydonianman but i'm doin better now. as for the universe i'm sure its bad enough.
cydonianman 1 year ago
I said nature was neutral, not balanced. Actually I agree with you about this issue, but you insist on mischaracterizing my position. And that has pissed me off.
DarwinsHamster 1 year ago
"my ass is twitchy"
lolwut?
Great video though.
SecularNumanist 1 year ago
btw ~ U seem like a nice dude ~ dude ~ just 2oo honorable 4 Ytube ~ I guess ~ that'll b that lil' Ytube secret ~
*cheers*
TJae1 1 year ago
if these things growing or occurring or what have you causes "collateral damage" somewhere in the process in some extremely convoluted manner that doesn't negate the fact that something the polar opposite from suffering has also occurred. it's your general situation, man... i've been there for the last 10 years; it erodes your memories of what genuine happiness and reduces ones ability to extrapolate anything positive -- from anything. there's a balnce, u've just become largely blind to it.
regresseur 1 year ago
u've become a master of what's shitty and "why life sucks", etc. b/c u've been in a negative and constricting situation for an extended (perhaps 'very' extended) period of time. your general Q, "what's the justification for all this suffering?" indicates a kind of blindness to all the things around you that are the antithesis of such. things that grow (every single plant & other organism around your house) is engaged in the opposite; every instance of happiness, gratification, etc. is the oposit
regresseur 1 year ago
Gary Inmendham is PERFECTLY RIGHT on all his video's, Life is a cesspool of Suffering.
Gary has the BEST Answers to these problems on Suffering, & Everything about Life, & What it really is!!!!!
CaptainNemoful 1 year ago
Hey man. Been following your channel for a while. To be honest, the only answer I found is to live because I am alive. I didn't chose this, no one did. All I can do is adopt rather than reproduce, and try to live a life that has as little cause for shame as possible. No one promised that this would be worth the ride, it's all people convincing themselves it's worth it. I can handle this darkness because it's all I'm made to do, I have to. What do you think of that point of view?
Yony42 1 year ago
Let the nukes fly.
wasmayboer 1 year ago
Hey billions of years of suffering aint a thing we have ice cream sandwiches.
DaveysNeurons 1 year ago
If I recall, it was observing the life cycle of the parasitic insects which caused Darwin to lose or greatly question his faith in a god. They lay their larvae inside a host's body and then the larvae eat their way out, slowly consuming the organism from within.
Cuoin 1 year ago
Just think about the amount of sentient organisms that will suffer this year (a number we truly cannot comprehend), then multiply that by the hundreds of millions of years into the past, as well as the thousands/millions/billions of years into the future...
TheMaleWithNoName 1 year ago
Gary, if you knew that the suffering in the universe would never come to an end, would you press the red button to end the universe? I wouldn't. I feel that the value of life is greater than the suffering. The experience that many people are living is worthwhile. Pointless, but worthwhile. Stupid, but worthwhile. And after death, any suffering doesn't even matter. We may as well plant our seeds because sex is the most anti-suffering moment that we can accomplish in this reality.
yetdeeplyinept 1 year ago
@yetdeeplyinept
"I feel that the value of life is greater than the suffering."
Shouldn't it be about the truth instead of what we personally feel. What possible argument can be given to show that the suffering is justified by the existence of life; when there is no need for life to even exist/be perpetuated.
"Pointless, but worthwhile."
Oxymoron?
"We may as well plant our seeds because sex..."
Sex =/= procreation; we have contraception.
TheMaleWithNoName 1 year ago
on the next episode of hoarders: inmendham
you are such a hypocrite inmendham you are a junky too and you want to live like the rest of us. animals arent bothered like we are by pain in the same way. sure in severe cases they may seek help. but i have had a cat that had a large part of his leg ripped off in a fight. and he wasnt even bothered by it. we are troubled by our pains because we are smart enough to think there is some way to remove the pain and in some cases this is true. in some
VirtualHolocaust 1 year ago
@VirtualHolocaust
Way to ignore the incomprehensible amount of horrors that animals go through, either due to nature or due to stupid, selfish humans like you.
TheMaleWithNoName 1 year ago
Damn, you're right.
Nature is pretty brutal. Animals get eaten alive on a routine basis, and the default reaction we are all supposed to have is "well, that's nature". Or, "Let nature run it's course..." And we're then expected to believe that nature is a beautiful thing. Just because all the animals look alike and act alike, doesn't mean they don't feel the same physical and emotional terrors that we would feel if we were in the same situation.
ugh... what a nightmare
AndyMH182 1 year ago 11
@AndyMH182 I had this sadistic thought: when we send those intergalactic probes around the universe, why not make sure hose are infected with life. When they eventually get stuck on some planet this will start again.
lolingattheism 1 year ago
i've viewed a couple of your vids w/interest, but the fact that you could plug such idiocy as the artificial toy crap made me lose some respect. Seriously, how could anyone make it through such nonsense?
OrwellsDaughter 1 year ago
@saaweeet If I wanted to call Gary a Nihilist or tell him to off himself, I would. But that's not debating, is it? Gary doesn't debate. He makes a video, and then insults everyone who disagrees with him. Maybe I should start "debating" like Gary.
Gary, you stupid fucking cunt. Why do you continue to make the same stupid fucktarded argument? If life is a pointless game that nobody can win, why do you still play? You stupid idiot.
incubus96 1 year ago
@incubus96
"Gary doesn't debate. He makes a video, and then insults everyone who disagrees with him."
Not another one of you dishonest / incredibly ignorant assholes...
Do I really need to list the instances in this video where he has responded to the opposing party with an argument?
TheMaleWithNoName 1 year ago
I think Lorelela is trying to "psychology" you--no off L, if you read this. But the fact is those of us concerned with psychologies do so for a reason: our brains are geared towards it.
I think you on the other hand approach it as philosophy. Thus the miscommunication.
fulishproductions 1 year ago
@fulishproductions Ah. I see you addressed this.
fulishproductions 1 year ago
@fulishproductions Unfortunately it's not that simple. I am not simply a psychologist any more than Gary is simply a philosopher. To categorise anyone in such simple terms is unfortunately to create the means to fail to communicate, whatever the categorisation. I know once it gets to this point we probably won't get any further (this time).
Loreleila 1 year ago
@L, no. No person is simple, and I apologize if my rough yet direct comment made you think I was putting you in a box. I was not. (Coincidentally I'm not the only rough yet direct guy around ;P )
So then, what I meant to say was simply that I find immense value in this philosophy. The tiny pieces of paper in our wallets are, indeed, made of far too much blood. True--some of them may be made of hard work done by intelligent men and women--however, the bright red blood kind of stands out.
fulishproductions 1 year ago
@Loreleila Point being I didn't mean to put you in a box, but it did seem as tho...ach let me go to your channel and watch your vid again.
fulishproductions 1 year ago
Suffering is not cumulative, two creatures suffering is not twice the suffering of one, any more than two happy people is actually more happiness. Pain is not some phantasmagorical energy that collects somewhere and festers. It’s a thought, an interpretation of electrochemical signals that exist only for the individual organism.
WilliamPbrane 1 year ago
@WilliamPbrane
I don't think he ever said that suffering is cumulative in the way you described, just that (as you said with your happiness example) two organisms suffering is more suffering than one organism suffering (assuming the intensity of suffering is the same).
TheMaleWithNoName 1 year ago
@TheMaleWithNoName Thoughts can only add up in the brain thinking them, they don’t exist independent of that brain. The “Global consciousness project” has been shown to be junk science, thoughts no matter how many brains are thinking them have no quantifiable affect or properties, therefore cannot “add up” to be more of anything quantifiable.
Suffering has value individually every human on the planet having a headache is still just one headache and less suffering than one person in agony.
WilliamPbrane 1 year ago
@WilliamPbrane
Again, I'm not saying suffering "adds up" in the sense that two small headaches equal one normal headache. Just that, clearly, if ten people have headaches then that is more events/instances of headaches (suffering) than just two people with headaches. Thus it can be said that there are more headaches (suffering), with 'more' simply meaning more events/instances of.
TheMaleWithNoName 1 year ago
@TheMaleWithNoName
I will accept “more instances” of something however, that’s just a descriptive and doesn’t mean more of something if that something is not real outside of each instance of it. Gary has used the work “multiply” which leads me to believe he thinks it does “add up.”
WilliamPbrane 1 year ago
Gary: you always talk about the problems (cannivalism, consumption, reproduction, addiction). You do that on this channel. Then I suggest you make a video with solutions to this problems also on this channel. Concrete solutions, if you have them. Otherwise, people will continue making assumptions about your goals.
How can we fix this mess (don´t waste suffering) in your view? Just in one video. A long one if it´s necessary.
fedea82 1 year ago
@fedea82 This is the question that I would like an aswer to.
Loreleila 1 year ago
@Loreleila See my response to fedea82.
TheMaleWithNoName 1 year ago
@TheMaleWithNoName So essentially your answer to suffering is death. I find it interesting that those with this opinion seem to remain steadfastly and often loudly alive.
Loreleila 1 year ago
@Loreleila How many times does everyone have to go over (he just did it in his LAST video) that human beings are part of a social fabric we cannot just extricate ourselves from. When I ran into Inmendham, I listened to his videos and I paid attention. It's very frustrating to see countless people apparently listen to him in a glazed over state letting his words just bounce off their brains and listen to their shallow knee jerk responses. I'm out of room.
booboonation 1 year ago
@booboonation People failing to listen to the actual content of someones words is all too common sadly. We all do it to a degree since we all have our own blindspots. Including Gary. It's especially prevalent here however, where basic ideas are jumped on and run with without any true understanding of them, or of accusing others of being something they simply are not because it's easier than taking the time to listen.
Loreleila 1 year ago
@Loreleila ~ U can reply here ~ rather than hiding behind Ur videos ~ I've yet 2 c Gary pull an under-tatic like that~ & ~ no Ur were not being honest w/ Urself w/ Me ~ U were exploiting my comments posted to Ur video ~ for Ur - 0 sum game ~
TJae1 1 year ago
@Loreleila " No, lying is not alright when convenient." allow Me 2 reply then ~ if U pose an issue to Me ~ which I didn't request ~ I should b allowd 2 answer & granted an complete & open conversation ~
TJae1 1 year ago
@Loreleila
1 of 2
"So essentially your answer to suffering is death."
That is quite a reckless and unfair way to put it.
In terms of suffering in civilisation, we can do many things not involving death to stop and prevent it. However that wasn't really the question; the question was about suffering in relation to the fundamental idea of life. As such, (for us) the solution to "consumption, reproduction, cannibalism, addiction" (i.e. ending suffering) is to cease procreating, which isn't death.
TheMaleWithNoName 1 year ago
@Loreleila
2 of 2
For the rest of the animal kingdom however, unfortunately it would have to be death, unless there is / would be some way to sterilize.
"seem to remain steadfastly and often loudly alive."
Not procreating =/= suicide. Killing yourself isn't going to end the suffering in the world. If anything, it's throwing away your only opportunity to reduce it.
TheMaleWithNoName 1 year ago
@TheMaleWithNoName "Killing yourself isn't going to end the suffering in the world. If anything, it's throwing away your only opportunity to reduce it."
Absolutely. However, it doesn't seem you've thought this through. You appear to be suggesting the ultimate eradication of humanity by an enforced cessation of births. Aside from the fact no one will buy that, imagine over time the young become less and less and the old to suffer increasingly. Does that seem a good solution to you?
Loreleila 1 year ago
@Loreleila
1 of 2
"You appear to be suggesting the ultimate eradication of humanity by an enforced cessation of births."
This is the second time you've put it in a reckless and unfair way. I never included the word enforced. Of course, in such a scenario where it has gained majority support, it may then be "enforced" onto the minority. However you did not preface with something like that, thus leading it to be reckless and unfair.
TheMaleWithNoName 1 year ago
@Loreleila
2 of 2
"Aside from the fact no one will buy that"
That does not negate the validity of it, and unfortunately I don't think there are any other solutions which would gain more support than this one.
"Does that seem a good solution to you?"
Clearly it's not perfect, but it's a small, short term loss to a big, long term gain. Unfortunately I don't think there are any other solutions which will create less suffering than this one.
TheMaleWithNoName 1 year ago
@TheMaleWithNoName Not at all. I'm presenting you with just one of the possible manifestations of your suggestion. The trouble with many of these suggestions (not just yours) is that unless the various possibilites are explored in terms of how they're likely to play out it will not be seen what is actually viable and what isn't. To end human life because some of it hurts seems utterly illogical to me.
Loreleila 1 year ago
@Loreleila
1 of 3
I have no problem with you exploring the solution, just that as I explained, including a presumptive addon without a qualifier or preface is quite reckless as it can imply something which isn't even being argued e.g. enforced without a majority.
TheMaleWithNoName 1 year ago
@TheMaleWithNoName
2 of 3
"To end human life because some of it hurts seems utterly illogical to me."
That is an extraordinarily gross understatement. Do I really need to go through humanity's horrors (both past and present); the wars, poverty, disease, disasters. That's the notable, major events; then there's the just as hard suffering on the smaller scale. Not to mention all the suffering humanity imposes onto animals, which is probably more than humans endure themselves.
TheMaleWithNoName 1 year ago
@Loreleila
3 of 3
All for what, so that the pointlessness can be perpetuated? So that the non-existent can be needlessly brought into existence? Remember, this solution isn't to go out and "end human life", it's simply, in a way, to do nothing; to keep things the way they are, with the non-existent remaining non-existent.
TheMaleWithNoName 1 year ago
@Loreleila ~ cya around :-)
TJae1 1 year ago
@Loreleila ~ It's nice Ur posting Ur perspectives for thought ~ think U'll b a fine alternative to the drunken ~ weasel/wizard ~ pier-ro ~ cheers ~
TJae1 1 year ago
@Loreleila I have a question, you seem to have a knee jerk reaction to the idea of extinction, have you questioned why you have this reaction? If so, I'm curious as to what the reason is.
So life has some sort of inherrent value that supercedes the negatives its mere existance creates in the form of suffering? I'm sorry, but I don't see that and I don't think it's a matter of perspectives either.
Just because life exists does not mean it "should",
BeardedBill86 1 year ago
@BeardedBill86 No knee jerk reation at all. Extinction will no doubt happen at some point, and my own will happen sooner than that of the human race (more than likely). It's a given. My problem with all this is that those who suggest human life should end never produce either a viable way this should happen, why it would be a genuinely useful idea or how the majority would ever be likely to buy it. It seems a lot of talk and very little action.
Loreleila 1 year ago
@Loreleila
We are not God's, we are limited in our abilities and means.. but since the situation itself is not viable to begin with, the solution should merely produce as little suffering as possible.
As to how usefull it is.. well that depends entirely upon what you mean by usefull, it's usefull to stop a situation producing a disproportionately large negative with far less positive, no?
And ofcourse the majority wont buy it in our lifetimes, but having the philosophy out there..-
BeardedBill86 1 year ago
- (cont) is important in and of itself, it's a position that needs to be presented so that it can be given due consideration instead of not even entering into the equation.
BeardedBill86 1 year ago
@BeardedBill86 ~ why ~ Loreleila can b the reactionary flip~ so ~ expect knee jerk reactions ~ She tends to dismiss objective thought or refuses or fails to follow thru w/ her espoused ideas ~ U tell Me/Us ~ I don't get it ~
TJae1 1 year ago
@Loreleila I'm also curious as to how you would react and view, in a hypothetical scenario, the knowledge that an Alien race far more advanced than us had a majority vetoed mass suicide plan enacted as opposed to enduring unknowable centuries of further existance before they might find a way to reduce suffering to acceptable levels, having concluded logically that the latter simply wasn't a justifiable or "viable" option.
BeardedBill86 1 year ago
@BeardedBill86 This is interesting. I used exactly the same argument on one of my videos where someone was arguing that sentience was what made life of worth, the only measurable factor in suffering, that therefore it was just fine to torture and kill animals who had less of it than us. I asked if aliens appeared with more sentience than us would it be ok for them to farm and kill us for food.
Loreleila 1 year ago
@Loreleila Simply having the word alien in your arguement doesn't really make it "exactly the same" since I was asking what your reaction would be to discovering that aliens had logically concluded the life experiment wasn't worth the time investment it would take them to fix it versus the cost.
Yours sounds more like an ethical arguement on the value of life and conciousness in its various forms.
BeardedBill86 1 year ago
@TheMaleWithNoName Overpopulation is only one of the problems Gary talks about. I was asking about the solutions he could give us for the whole picture.
fedea82 1 year ago
@Loreleila ~ didn't watch this 1 thru ~ will chck it out :-)
TJae1 1 year ago
@fedea82
Firstly, even if there isn't a solution, or the solution is not accepted, it is still worthwhile to identify and defend what the truth of our reality is.
Anyway, the solution (for human life at least) is quite simple and has been stated many many times; we simply need to stop needlessly reproducing. If we don't perpetuate the problem, then the problem won't exist.
After that there is only the animal life to take care of; and I use the word 'only' very loosely here.
TheMaleWithNoName 1 year ago
I've always been a shithead fan, but the buttholes are not without their talent.
Sarahon06 1 year ago
thanks for the heads up
TehMorbidAtheist 1 year ago
Little sparkly sparkles...LOL... faved.. very well summarized I have to say as to your viewpoint.
Elenkhos 1 year ago
If none if this matters, why even bother trying to reduce suffering? If life is completely pointless and going nowhere, then who cares? Why shouldn't I cause the most suffering possible? Seriously. Why even bother with YouTube videos? Why bother waking up in the morning? Why bother doing anything anywhere at all? With your logic, existing is pointless, so why bother with it?
TheMusicShogun 1 year ago
@TheMusicShogun, why would the recognition that something is broken logically compel someone to walk away and leave it that way ? retorical question as you are blocked asshole.
inmendham 1 year ago 3
@inmendham No that is not true, we are individuals like a republican, its not canabilism. Baby chickens experience closer to that of the graphics card in your computer than the sophisticated brain of a human baby that produces qualia.
Citigroup100 1 year ago
@inmendham look at the emotion center of the bird brain compared to human once.
Citigroup100 1 year ago
@inmendham those killing factories we still have even at their peak right now do show how barbaric we are and the truth about reality if you have a clear view of whats going on. I think you can see the reality to some degree.
Citigroup100 1 year ago
@inmendham peoples brains die out when they get older so they feel less emotional pain. For most life can be decent for some it is hell. Minimize pain increase hapiness utilitarianism. When I spent a month is jail there was soeone in there for 3 more years and he was aways so happy. I asked how he could be happy when he had to sit there for 3 fucking years. All the morons in jail just started insiting "you got to man" "you have to."
Citigroup100 1 year ago
@inmendham The information that took billions of years is not even complex. hey bob hey mike wheres boby late again probably consumed alchohol with mike c last night we have to go to joes to meet mike 4.
Citigroup100 1 year ago
@inmendham no no no insects don't feel anything. Again, look at the graphics card example. Insects are functional only. They do not have a dynamic core in their brain - no frontal brain mass, therefore no qualia. It is like your leg after it’s been injected full of anesthetic.
Citigroup100 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@inmendham no no no insects don't feel anything. Again, look at the graphics card example. Insects are functional only. They do not have a dynamic core in their brain no frontal brain mass, therefore no qualia. It is like your leg after it’s been injected full of anesthetic.
Citigroup100 1 year ago
@TheMusicShogun ~ FYI ~ The dude ~ never claimd that ~ he's simply ellaborating a comparative pnt for suffering ~ & good pnts btw ~ :-)
TJae1 1 year ago
@TheMusicShogun ~ Gary has never implied an apathy 4 suffering ~ It's a basis for his philosophy ~ I'm pretty well neutral & usually won't sponsor error ~ no matter the party ~ His reaction 2 Ur comment ~ is understandable ~ may U'll b on probation like pier-ro ~ not certain about 2b & gratex though ~ he does have other channels ~ now U know ~ * cheers *
TJae1 1 year ago
Don't get me wrong but you make fun of "phantasmic oracle people" and what not but yet you here sying that everything has to be measured in suffering...but according to who? And you tell us we have to justify ourselves the lives we lead but why should we be held to a standard that is also just man made in this case by you.
I hope I didn't sound insulting it's a honest question.
NiklasKing87 1 year ago
@NiklasKing87
You don't 'have to' however if you consider yourself a rational and moral human being it makes sense to appreciate that suffering is effectively a unit of value (the only objective unit of value in my opinion), and therefore you shouldn't waste it. As for standards, if you reject the notion of an intelligent designer then all standards must necessarily be man-made since the universe has no brain and therefore no ability to impose standards.
ebonyeclipse 1 year ago
It's truly sad that some ppl on here will deny the suffering of sentient animals that do not have the designation homo yet when confronted by a dying pet Dog or Cat will have it put down to end its suffering? Go figure.....
TheSuicidalOptimist 1 year ago
@TheSuicidalOptimist ~ why isn't pier-ro thoughtful like this ~ good pnts as always ~ humans R prized above all creatures ~ or sacred I suppose ~ that's why ~ I feel bettr @ night knowing ~ murder is a civil offense ~ not mosquito control :-)
TJae1 1 year ago
U r spot on sir...:) Im with ya
rad1965 1 year ago
good pnts ~ as usual ~ enjoy the thoughts ~ cheers *
TJae1 1 year ago
I can't see it the same as you any more than you can the way I do. The difficulty for me here is the framework in which you view it is pretty cast iron and you ridicule when challenged. I have no idea how to get through to you and that doesn't make me (or you) stupid. But I'm not here to convince you of anything It would be great to reach a point of genuine understanding on all this but it does seem an impossibility. So what is your solution Gary? To this and to life.
Loreleila 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Loreleila
The Eraser - Thom Yorke [Sasha Coma Remix]
/watch?v=3TwMZM1PkdE
Do the opposite, do not listen to them. If you want out.
FORGIVESATAN 1 year ago
@Loreleila , Just as I would not "agree to disagree" on a issue like rape or slavery, I will not concede your right to disagree until you earn it with something I can interrupt as a reasonable justification... saying life "just is" is maybe even less rational than saying God just is.
inmendham 1 year ago
@inmendham Your logic seems as illogical as mine does to you. Why should the burden of proof be on me? I have as much right to disagree (or as little) as you do.
Loreleila 1 year ago
@Loreleila, you are essentially justifying the brutal rape of feeling life on earth for the glory of your trivial gluttony... what do you expect me to say "have a nice day" ? you are sadistic loons I can only hope to convert into merely masochistic idiots. As for our arguments being equally reason based and logical ...I will just point out that "that is what all the god nuts say"
inmendham 1 year ago
@inmendham That's not what I'm doing at all. But you're clearly convinced of it so there's not much more I can say.
Loreleila 1 year ago
@Loreleila, where is the evidence of an alternative interpretation? I ask how bad does it have to get? you answer "anything goes" As our God of nature and her crude forces are too sacred to be judged.
inmendham 1 year ago
@inmendham How bad does it have to get before what? That you blow your brains out? Or that I admit it's all a crock of shit? I'm not saying anything goes. Have you listened to anything I said at all? Please don't put words in my mouth. You seem to see only suffering (other than in human babies, who are somehow exempt) and no more. I see other aspects of life as well as suffering and won't apologise for it. I've made it clear the more strategies for minimising suffering we have the better.
Loreleila 1 year ago
@Loreleila "Or that I admit it's all a crock of shit?" bingo... meaningful change will require this explicit and direct admission. The experiment is fundamentally broken ...putting makeup on the corpse will FIX nothing and will just amount to another stupid human ego trick.
inmendham 1 year ago
@inmendham I'll happily admit the human 'civilisation' trick is broken, if indeed it was ever not, and breaking more all the while. You may mean more, but if we were to assume I fully agreed with you on that, what then would be your solution?
Loreleila 1 year ago
@OURZIONTUBE Thanks Troll boy ;-)
beardfreak1969 1 year ago
@OURZIONTUBE reup the song and send me a link and stop spamming, that's all I'm complaining about I have no idea what you do online. GIMMIE MY SONG
booboonation 1 year ago
@OURZIONTUBE Please reupload the "knowledge of self" mix you have and send me a link. And stop spamming the board with nonsense
booboonation 1 year ago
@OURZIONTUBE "Groupie. Fan boy / girl" - I'd rather trim Gary's hedge than yours, you god bothering spam turd =)
beardfreak1969 1 year ago
@OURZIONTUBE What are you saying "no" to, and how is what your theory is relelvant to these realities? It makes no difference if a god has left us or not. Why are you here if you refuse to listen to the video?
booboonation 1 year ago
Comment removed
djancak 1 year ago
@OURZIONTUBE Why don't you listen to his arguments, and respond to his actual arguments. One is that the nature of biological life is suffering. The natural world suffers separate from us.
booboonation 1 year ago
@OURZIONTUBE Ok done.
booboonation 1 year ago
I'm only on two minutes and it's a fave already. I'll never forget that one time you pointed out that even if most of us were like elephant men with public drool fountains people would be justifying it because they're lost in their own addictive subjective addiction to sensation.
booboonation 1 year ago 2
I don't see why people equate pleasure in with suffering, they are discrete entities with suffering incurring more negative value.
booboonation 1 year ago
I love you. LOL
beardfreak1969 1 year ago