The Inconsistencies of Efilist Philosophy

If life is not purposefully, rationally-driven, it does not require a justification for its continuance, just like you are not required to give the Universe or people a justification for staying alive; you simply exist, until you stop doing so.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• efilism
• antinatalism
• empathy
• mission statement
• david hume
• emil cioran
• leon shestov
• arthur schopenhauer

[qrqrqrqr1]

I don't understand the is/ought gap argument. So because ethical systems are based on subjective value judgements, we should abandon them and wallow in moral nihilism?

[tranquil87]

@qrqrqrqr1 That's an is/ought argument you just made, so no. There is no 'we should do' here, only an explanation as to why Gary's system is not one big indestructible and coherent logical truth like he claims it to be. He makes the first mistake thinking that arbitrariness should respond to reasonableness, which is contradictory and illogical, and then he gives a moral incentive (an ought) from an is-statement (which happens to be subjective also: 'life is shit' is not an objective truth.)

[paxguerilla]

I am so glad you verbalized this.

[tranquil87]

@paxguerilla I am so glad you are so glad!

[babylonoise]

3 - being the self is so arbitrary, it contradicts our logic, and the way out may take

thousand years of sufferings or be just dead. conciousness inherited a new psychologic evolution which distracted us even more from being in a "natural" equilibrium. I think to remember, buddha said, some places dont fit enlightenment,

and he might have well meant our condition here too.

good luck anyway

[tranquil87]

@babylonoise

The sense that every struggle brings defeat

Because Fate holds no prize to crown success;

That all the oracles are dumb or cheat

Because they have no secret to express;

That none can pierce the vast black veil uncertain

Because there is no light beyond the curtain;

That all is vanity and nothingness.

[Evaporator134a]

You are too far behind. I can't help you have to catch up first.

[Evaporator134a]

wow man you are from 300 years ago. So far behind.

[Christopholaes]

@tranquil87 Completely!!

[tranquil87]

@Christopholaes Yep, it's nonsensical really.

[Christopholaes]

This is why I often ask efilists to ask themselves why isn't the fact that life does or can exist is enough of a 'reason' for existence in the first place.

They're making an assumed arbitrary judgement that existence 'needs' to be justified or have a 'reason' for it's continued existence. Completely ignoring the fact that life existing at all may be the whole 'point' in the first place.

I'm pretty sure no great arbiter in the sky has told us to ignore this obvious possibility?

I wonder y they do