I know there are many decent arguments for existence, such as enjoying the world as an aesthetic phenomenon, the possibility of knowing the universe, or the ability to create meaning out of nothing. The problem is that all these arguments are self-referential—they are valid only for those already 'buried' in existence. They cannot apply to a non-existent being, because in non-existence there is no subject to feel anything; there is only absolute neutrality. Even if 100 percent of life were happiness and success (which it never is), a non-existent being would still lose nothing. For example: you may feel bad that your imaginary friend does not exist, but that friend feels nothing about his own non-existence. You may feel lonely or resentful, but your friend cannot feel rejected or unfulfilled. He simply is not.
>>18455020fuck you asshole my friend is real
>>18455020People with this mentality are just mad they aren't reality warpers
>>18455020>modern man sees society so fucked up that he gaslight himself into not having children because it's not worth living though it>instead of killing all jews and fixing society so children would be worth havingwhat causes this?
>>18455033How many Jews have you killed anon?
>>18455039This has to be a group effort you retard.A single person killing a jew or two even everyday would literally not change a single thing.
>Non-Existence>having quality, whether positive or not>being comparable on any degree to Existence considering this aforementioned lack of quality>implying
>>18455020>emdashllm slop. binned
>>18455020If non existence was better, you would kill yourself. You won't, so we all know you are lying. The question is, "why are you lying"?
