Can you think of anything more incomprehensibly cruel than having children...

Whenever people say childbirth is inherently good I make them look up Harlequin babies

Depression is the opposite of excited.

>x is inherently y
Looks like someone has been spooked

antinatalism hinges on the premise that the only thing that matters is avoiding pain which, unless you believe morality is a spook, is a pretty myopic moral philosophy

If you hate life so much then kill yourself. If you don't, then why would you deny the opportunity for life to others?

No, depression is a continual low-level state of anxiety and agitation.

>reading comprehension

Well shit. Sounds like me, but I was never called depressed.

There's a difference between already existing vs. not yet existing. After you already exist you're likely hung up on craving pleasures and heavily pressured against suicide by your instincts and emotions. A not yet existing person isn't stuck with any of that so they can continue not existing without suffering from it.

Why would I care about someone else?

Nothing wrong with continuing the human species. I'll see to it that I (properly) raise 5 kids of my own.

It's only suffering if you're weak.

But if you know that it is so bad and can see past the "addictions" then own up to your words and end it. That way, someone else has a chance of enjoying it.

It's a widely misunderstood illness.
youtube.com/watch?v=NOAgplgTxfc

So what you're saying is, given the choice, you prefer to live than not to live?

>It's only suffering if you're weak.

t. a someone who isn't suffering from a severe chronic illness.

If you were stuck shitting out buckets of blood, diarrhea, and intestinal scar tissue 20 times a day from inflammatory bowel disease you'd probably be less convinced suffering is just a weakness of character.

And yet people suffering such terrible ravages seldom commit suicide. Almost as if even a terrible, miserable life is better than no life!

Also inb4 "that's just one random medical condition, most people don't get it." There are more fucked up medical conditions out there then you could even read about using all the days left in your current lifetime. Chances are more than negligible your child will be afflicted with one of them.

Battered women often stay in abusive relationships. It doesn't mean they like it. It means they're afraid of taking action to end it.

It means they prefer being a battered wife to death.

And how could non-existence possibly be worse than intense suffering? You have to exist as a prerequisite to feeling unpleasant about something. Nobody has ever felt bad about *not* existing.

>And how could non-existence possibly be worse than intense suffering?

Ask someone with a crippling illness. You may (stupidly) ask, but the fact is people generally don't just kill themselves, even when in extreme suffering.

Not wanting to die is an instinct, not an indication of preferring existence over non-existence.

What do you think preferences are? I prefer breathing to suffocation, is that "just an instinct"? I prefer red wine to white, is that "just an instinct"? The answer in both cases is "yes".

It's not a choice to feel aversion to dying, it's a very old and powerful instinct. The fact so many manage to overcome this instinct despite it being one of the first things programmed into living creatures since the dawn of life on Earth ought to tell you just how bad suffering can get.

Some people kill themselves, that's true. But faggots like OP, who whine about "MUH SUFFERING" and "MUH ANTINATALISM" almost never actually kill themselves. Why? Because they don't actually believe what they say.

There's a difference between preferring something vs. being instictually averse to action take to end that something. You're trying to make it seem like people must love life and hate nonexistence because they don't commit suicide when in reality they just have an ancient instinctual aversion to suicide that operates independent of their desire not to exist.

>There's a difference between preferring something vs. being instictually averse to action take to end that something.

No, there isn't. instincts and preferences are the same exact thing, you don't "reason" your way to either, they are innate reactions.

>You're trying to make it seem like people must love life and hate nonexistence because they don't commit suicide

No, I'm pointing out the obvious and undeniable fact that people prefer to live than to die.

>when in reality they just have an ancient instinctual aversion to suicide that operates independent of their desire not to exist.

Your instinctual aversion to death IS your desire to not not exist.

What's so hard to understand that antinatalists don't want to die, they wish they hadn't been born.

>Why?

Because there's a difference between already existing and ending existence vs. not existing and continuing to not exist. If you were already addicted to heroin you would really want some more heroin. But that doesn't mean it's a moral good to give someone who's never had heroin their first dose. It would be better to have them continue to not ever be a part of that addiction.

An already existing person will tend to be averse to dying, because they're already caught up in instincts and emotions that work against that behavior. A non-existent person doesn't have that problem. They can continue not existing without feeling the slightest negative feeling over it.

There's a really simple solution to this "problem", called "eat a bullet". Antinatlists are just whiny babies who want people to reassure them that they DO matter. Well guess what, you don;t matter, and if you hate being alive so much, no-one is stopping you killing yourself.

So, again, GIVEN A CHOICE, you prefer live to death. You just wish you hadn't been given the choice, because you're an infant who is unwilling to actually do what you claim you want to do, that is, kill yourself.

>Your instinctual aversion to death IS your desire to not not exist.

No, you're conflating the journey with the destination. You would like to have a million dollars. You wouldn't like to spend a couple years being a prostitute for gay men to fuck you in the ass in exchange for that million dollars. Being averse to the process of dying isn't a contradiction to desiring not to exist.

I'm not too interested in children, but I'm not going to pretend procreation is not literally the point of life.

Nigs have lots of kids because they cant into birth control, if they get horny they will fuck immediately, and african mammies cant off most of their spawn like they did back in the pre slavery days.

>Being averse to the process of dying isn't a contradiction to desiring not to exist.

Sure, but you don't have to spend a year fucking men to die, Just take a heroin overdose, you'll die with a smile on your face.

Any "preference" to living over suicide in an already existing person is irrelevant to the case of a non-existent person continuing to not exist. You can't take an instinctual aversion to death in the already living and use it as evidence the non-existent person therefore somehow prefers life over non-existence.

You can't choose never to have existed. This should be obvious even to you. You CAN choose not to continue to exist, and yet you don't. Why is this? Could it be that you PREFER being alive to being dead? PROVE ME WRONG, faggot.

Heroin overdose would be a terrible way to die. It doesn't feel good to take too much of an opioid, it feels like you're drowning. If anyone is really serious about going through with it, shotgun with slug through the mouth to the brain would be the best approach for what most people have access to. Even better would be going to the netherlands and getting professional euthanasia.

Well you can choose whatever means you lie, the fact is you have the opportunity to end your "suffering" painlessly whenever you want. And yet, you don't. Could it be that being alive, no matter how "terrible" you find it, is better than the alternative?

I already have proven you wrong, you're citing an ancient instinctual reflex as though it were evidence you like living.

>You must love kicking your leg in the air since you keep doing it every time I hit your knee with this mallet!

Literally your argument right now.

Even the mildest suffering would be worse than non-existence, non-existence is a totally benign status. Nobody feels bad about not existing. Having a reflexive aversion to getting there isn't an argument against that, it's a fundental part of evolutionary biology. Animals wouldn't do too well at surviving and reproducing if they had no aversion to running off a cliff. It's nonsensical to use that as an argument these animals love life.

You don't have to like being alive, but you can't claim you have no choice in the matter. Just kill yourself, its easy and can be painless. But you won't, because you know your pathetic kvetching is just infantile narcissism and not a genuine hatred of existence.

I prefer not existing to being dead, retard

Where does this notion of life is suffering come from. I'm very familiar with Hindu and Buddhist views but I don't agree that life is net suffering. I mean it's not great but too many arguments start with the presupposition that suffering is the dominant aspect of life. And this notion is left unchallenged.

Are you referring to the suffering of raising a child, the suffering of existence (for the child), or both?

Shinji pls

I don't know if you're still here, but I was following the argument and you are a complete imbecile

Why is a child's life inherently a cause of suffering? You are creating your legacy, and not only that you're allowing something that would never have existed to experience the boundless wonder of the world.

>Where does this notion of life is suffering come from.

It was probably more self-evident in older times when horrible disease and poor living conditions were more commonplace. A lot of people still have horrible diseases and poor living conditions today though. And the ones who don't are at best enjoying the scratch to the itch that is desire. Pleasure isn't really a moral good for a nonexistent person to justify bringing him or her into existence since the only reason pleasure is sought in the first place is because we're born into a craving for it. This goes back to the heroin analogy. A heroin addict will want heroin, but that isn't a good argument for introducing heroin for the first time to a non-user.

Or to summarize this all in as simple terms as possible, there's pic related. Nobody feels bad about depriving the millions of potential lives from existence each time they masturbate, right? Yet I think most here would feel bad about seeing their dog whining in pain and vomiting every few minutes in between seizures from cancer. And while some might be opposed to putting a dog to sleep under any circumstances, certainly all of us can at least see why you might consider putting the dog to sleep as a moral good. If a creature is suffering severely, ending that suffering through euthanasia is a good deed towards the sufferer. This is the asymmetry of pleasure and suffering in existence. People tend to believe apparent "opposites" like pleasure and suffering ought to be considered as equal forces, but really, they don't operate equally.