Debunk this. You cannot.
>>24052116>pain is always more painfulUtter bullshit. Anyone who has ever gotten a shot at the doctor knows that the anticipation is worse than the shot itself.
>>24052116Have sex
>>24052116Also, how could we possibly quantify and compare the amount of pleasure a predator has compared to pain of its prey?What a fucking stupid quote.
>>24052140If the top end of your reference scale for pain is getting a booster shot I don't think you're fit for arguing the topic.
>>24052178Did I ever say that was the top end? Read the quote. I gave a single scenario that disproves the quote. When did the quote ever reference the too end of the pain scale? I didn’t.
>>24052143Okay is your mom available? That's a rhetorical question and the answer is always yes.
>>24052145You're a fucking illiterate monkey, incapable of rational thought and should be castrated, enslaved, and then tortured to death.
>>24052140This is clearly a godawful example because many well-adjusted adults, including myself, aren't even remotely bothered before getting a booster shot; we can precisely rationalize that the effect won't be hurtful. This is probably only an issue among children and the like, to the point of even getting across as a 'gotcha'.
>>24052374uhh, rude?
>>24052374>loses argument>screeches autisticallyEvery time
I literally do not care about Notions and Propositions and Statements and Theses whatsoever. Why would I worry about debunking some irrelevant, effeminate philosopher who lived in 17-whatever the fuck when I could be making money and fucking women. Philosophy is for small men who can't navigate the world
>>24052385Stop moving goalposts. None of what you said is hinted at in the quote.The fact remains. The expectation of joy and pain often outweighs the experience. The quote is dumb and provides no real evidence to support this assertion.
>>24052116I felt the opposite many times in my life. Have your expectations never been surpassed when expecting pleasure? Have you never feared in vain to feel pain just to feel a smaller one?
Yeah, and a stupid person might think sex is a counterexample where multiple people only experience pleasure but in fact its existence causes so many poor incels constant pain that we should definitely do away with it.
>>24052140Way to prove OP's point with the faggiest, most retarded example, dumbass.
how about the idea that certain types of pain can be pleasurable? pain can release endorphins and can be enjoyable after things such as exercise? All you need to do is develop a tiny bit of masochism in humanity and it will tip the scales away from pain
>>24052448>Have your expectations never been surpassed when expecting pleasure? Have you never feared in vain to feel pain just to feel a smaller one?Very rarely. Sex, food, drinking, as well as countless books, etc. are always at least a little disappointing to me. In fact, they're a complete letdown most of the time, whereas the one time I went to the hospital for a minor surgery that I expected not to stress me much, they somehow fucked it up and I had internal bleeding and it was horrific; the pain itself and the long recovery process. Not to mention every relationship breakup I've had in was way more painful and harder than it rationally should have been. So my experiences in life definitely correspond to the quote.
>>24052145Pretty sure one could use their brain and logically think about it for a minute.
>>24052116So getting sucked off by the most beautiful women in the world 500 times is outweighed by stubbing your toe once? This guy is retarded.
>>24052116You can really tell when someone did not have any children. The love you have for your kids and family is bigger than any pain you can feel imo.
>>24052537and what of the pain of losing a child anon?
>>24052551Less pain than the pleasure of having the child. Typically parents don't regret having them when they die.
>>24052490Maybe I'm a pessimist and you are an optimistic.
Would you accept 1000 years of euphoric pleasure if it was followed by 24 hours of the worst pain imaginable?
>>24052467I disproved the quote
>>24052492Ok, explain it then
>The pain in the world always outweighs the pleasure.So, an experience of pain=0.000...001 outweighs an experience of a pleasure=∞?
>>24052436Pretty sure Schopenhauer has had more sex than you and chasing dollars is jew shit. You need to be vaporized in a concentration camp.
>>24052707>1000 years of pleasure followed by the last time my Crohn's flared up.Sure.
>>24052707it would be better the other way around.
>>24052116I like this quote just for the damning mental image it gives me, but if you take the words here at face value, they are pretty flimsy.>pain is always worse than anticipatednot only is this wrong, sometimes its the exact opposite>the pain in the world outweighs the pleasurewhat fucking metric could you use to assert this
>>24052116>Pleasure is never as pleasant as we expectDude never got a blowjob. I feel transported to another dimension, it's always way better than I expect. Yeah yeah, coomer mindset, blah blah, but there are certain pleasures that are divinely satisfying and transformative. I feel people who rail against baseline pleasure/pain are themselves experiencing a deficit, which amounts almost to a cry for help. Very sad.
>>24052855How consistently does this happen? It's called the honey moon phase for a reason.
>>24052116I dunno I fucked my gf twenty different ways for two hours on ecstacy and it was pretty much the greatest thing ever. far better than I could have imagined.
>>24052760just use your brain pathetic brainlet
>>24052116He’s not wrong. Over time pleasure suffers from diminishing returns while pain only gets harder to endure.
>>24052973People get used to pain over time as well, buddy.
>>24052143I don't want to hear the devil laugh ...
>>24052760You seriously can't imagine that getting ripped to shreds with your intestines out and losing blood rapidly feels worse than eating until you're full feels good?
>>24052537>>24052565LOL this nigga has never heard of postpartum depression and the enormous amount of people who neglect their children who end up being pieces of shit themselves.>Less pain than the pleasure of having the childYeah, right.
>>24052993I can imagine that I'd feel no pain because of adrenaline and shock
>>24052821>what fucking metric could you use to assert thisUsing your eyes and seeing what humans do to other humans and especially other living creatures both directly and indirectly on the entire planet?
>>24052993Quantify it. Without quantification everything is relative and the quote is bullshit because it’s talking about amounts.
>>24053002Dumbass. Just make a qualitative, biased, and subjective observation to confirm this philosophers appeal to truth.
>>24053002he didn't say on the planet, he said in the world
>>24052995What point do you think you're refuting?
>>24052996>adrenaline and shockThose mechanisms are far from anesthetics and death from predation often involves prolonged agony. Sure, adrenaline can aid in survival by suppressing pain temporarily, but it doesn't eliminate suffering entirely, especially during prolonged or severe injuries.On the other hand, the pleasure of eating is functional and not comparable to the prey's suffering. Besides, evolution prioritizes efficiency and survival, meaning predators don't derive the kind of intense euphoria humans associate with pleasure.
>>24053003>>24053006>>24053008You can't quantify subjective experiences because pleasure and pain are qualitative by nature. You can, however, use your eyes and see the world around you: war, exploitation, factory farming, environmental degradation, etc. which suggest that widespread suffering often exceeds isolated moments of joy.
>>24053036>You can't quantify subjective experiencesWhat are pain charts?
>>24053039Tools to approximate and communicate subjective experiences, not to objectively quantify them.
>>24053036>You can't quantify subjective experienceswere you born yesterday?
>>24053041you know your argument is garbage when you resort to semantics
ON WOMEN>"It is because women’s reasoning powers are weaker that they show more sympathy for the unfortunate than men, and consequently take a kindlier interest in them. On the other hand, women are inferior to men in matters of justice, honesty, and conscientiousness. Again, because their reasoning faculty is weak, things clearly visible and real, and belonging to the present, exercise a power over them which is rarely counteracted by abstract thoughts, fixed maxims, or firm resolutions, in general, by regard for the past and future or by consideration for what is absent and remote. Accordingly they have the first and principal qualities of virtue, but they lack the secondary qualities which are often a necessary instrument in developing it. Women may be compared in this respect to an organism that has a liver but no gall-bladder">"Nothing different can be expected of women if it is borne in mind that the most eminent of the whole sex have never accomplished anything in the fine arts that is really great, genuine, and original, or given to the world any kind of work of permanent value. This is most striking in regard to painting, the technique of which is as much within their reach as within ours; this is why they pursue it so industriously. Still, they have not a single great painting to show, for the simple reason that they lack that objectivity of mind which is precisely what is so directly necessary in painting.">"The first love of a mother, as that of animals and men, is purely instinctive, and consequently ceases when the child is no longer physically helpless. After that, the first love should be reinstated by a love based on habit and reason; but this often does not appear, especially where the mother has not loved the father. The love of a father for his children is of a different nature and more sincere; it is founded on a recognition of his own inner self in the child, and is therefore metaphysical in its origin."
>>24053042No, were you? Can you tell the difference between subjective experiences and physical phenomena?
>>24053047Please define these words:>subjective>quantify
>>24053045>distinguishing between approximation and objective measurement is just semanticsOkay, retard.
>>24052490>Sex, food, drinking, as well as countless books, etc. are always at least a little disappointing to me. In fact, they're a complete letdown most of the timeAsk your doctor for some anti-depressants.
>>24053054>ermmmmmm pain charts don't quantify experiences, they approximate and communicate themwhat does quantify mean, you obese moron
>>24053053>subjectiveBased on personal experience. Varies from person to person.>quantifyMeasuring and expressing something in terms of magnitude. Often with numbers but not necessarily.But even when we try to quantify something subjective like pain, it’s still influenced by individual interpretation. Physical phenomena are quantified more objectively because they're measured with standardized tools and methods (temperature, weight, speed) which are consistent regardless of individual perception.
>>24053064Sorry, that was a strong 6 on my offence chart. I can't reply ITT anymore.
>>24053074>try to quantify something subjective like pain, it’s still influenced by individual interpretationcorrect, it's all operating through the threshold of human sensory perception>Physical phenomena are quantified more objectively because they're measured with standardized tools and methodsno, completely wrongphysical phenomena is measured using the exact same human senses that "subjective experiences" are measured withwhy would human sensory perception be completely reliable for numerical measurements, but completely unreliable for the "subjective experience" of physical pain
>>24052116True. I was stabbed a week ago and even if you frequently watch rekts or gore like me. The pain you imagine is always a LOT worse than you imagine
>>24052537Have you ever interacted with a boomer?
>>24052537>t. Juden Peterstein
>>24052116Desire's another beast entire.
>>24052529Reading comprehension, tranny
>>24052537Schopenhauer did have children though. Furthermore, he considered that pleasure is worse than suffering, so the simple fact that people like you exist is incredibly demonic.
>>24052873I've lived with my gf for 8 years now. I communicated to her very early on the importance of this act of service to bring us closer and maintain a strong bond in our relationship, and how it fulfills a very significant need in my life. My own sex drive is lower than average baseline, but this arrangement ensures frequency and sustainability, on top of our normal sexual habits. Honestly, I have a disdain for people who are incapable of regulation their emotions in a way that ensures long term happiness. If you are such a person prone to "honey moon phases", do you not examine why you are incapable of prolonging the positive aspects present in the early parts of a relationship? This is genuinely perplexing to me. Although, I am personally grateful for the fact that I do not experience the phenomenon of "diminishing returns", for example, I can eat the same meal for weeks at a time and it is as pleasurable and satisfying the twelfth day in a row as it was the first, likewise, each act of my partner's oral devotion to me sparks the same transcendent joy as the first time. I can only convey my commiserations and sorrowful pity for those unable to find such a rewarding ongoing arrangement, for it seems to me that I have obtained the vaunted and much sought after essence of love itself, of closeness in it's multifaceted array of pleasures both Earth-bound and heavenly. Gentlemen, I convey my sincere hope that each of you encounter such rapture in your journeys through life.
Um, the animals I eat are already dead and McNuggets make me feel as good as they ever did
>>24052116Subjective states have no objective and universal ratio for measure. Life is neither good nor bad, just boring and that's what makes a pessimist a real pessimist.
>>24053408This. You're always exactly as happy as you think you are.
>>24053002More like you hyperfocus on the bad and ignore the millions of people living happily and content like never before. (or at least they were until our nations started being filled up with hostile outsiders)
>>24053393I didn't know what niggers post on 4chan
>>24052551>>24052995>>24053121>>24053142>>24053236Continue seething kikes, I'm going to continue having beautiful, strong, smart white babies and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it
>>24052145Nothing in life counterbalances the pain of death.
>>24053549Lol ok, soooo deep
>>24052145>Also, how could we possibly quantify and compare the amount of pleasure a predator has compared to pain of its prey?Common sense + Empathy
>>24053581>empathy no such thing
>>24053581What the fuck are you talking about
>>24053581>Common senselollmao even
>>24053215He's comparing 2 different things, and so am I.
>>24053525Is Schopenhauer a kike too? Also, no you won't kek you can't even get laid and don't leave your basement, let's not fool ourselves here.
>the agony of being consumed vastly outweighs the pleasure of consumption>PROOF? SOURCE? The internet is dead.
>>24053081You're conflating two distinct things: the role of human sensory perception and the process of quantification. While it's true that sensory perception is subjective even when it comes to measurements of physical phenomena, and yes all measurements have this degree of subjectivity, the distinction is in the tools and methods used for quantification, which can reduce (but not eliminate) subjectivity when measuring physical phenomena. The standardized tools and methods used in natural science operate based on consistent principles with which different people arrive at the same measurements/which can be verified by others. The level of reliability and repeatability is far greater than assessing subjective experience like pain, which don't have an equivalent standard of measurement because they rely entirely on individual interpretation and self-reporting, which makes them inherently personal and variable.
>>24053981Uhm, anon... what if the animals ENJOY being eaten alive? Did you ever think of that? And all the wars, diseases, environmental destruction, etc. in this soulless, automated, industrial world? Well, I think it's clear that eating chicken tendies and cumming inside a pussy and bringing a child that will most likely not grow up to be a decent human being into this world outweighs that. U mad, bro?
>>24052116It's wrong. It's a cynics perspective and it's a dumb way to live. The cynic lives in fear and disgust and eternal childish obstinance and an irrational expectation that he is owed a life floating on a satin pillow
>>24053236He possibly had a child with a maid that he promptly abandoned and tried to get a woman he was interested in to leave with him without her son in the city during a cholera outbreak, doesn't really equal raising and bonding with your children. Disingenuous faggot
>>24053997Anyone who can't endure their hand placed on a blazing hot stove for a full second or two has no business contesting what Schope is saying here, that the pain of having your entire being torn apart and digested is orders of magnitude more horrible than eating is pleasurable.
>>24054003What tripe. Bite some flesh off from the inside of your cheek, you have now experienced a fraction of a fraction of the pain of being eaten alive.
>>24054003>it's wrong because... IT JUST IS OKAY?Alrighty
>>24054005UHM, SOURCE???
>>24054004>Schopenhauer potentially both fucked a maid AND impregnated herwhat the FUCKand this guy claims to suffer?
>>24053976Is there a more kiked position than discouraging white people to procreate? Listen, I'm just not taking points on happiness from one of the most well known miserable cunts of all time
>>24052145Eat a hamburger, take note of the pleasure you feel while doing so. Now imagine if an alien put you in between two buns and crushed you to death with its teeth. I think the answer is obvious.
>>24054015You will never outbreed your enemies, and your children will be debased by the same forces that have debased you. Stop posting you absolute gump.
>>24054016Um, yeah, but what about getting a shot at the doctor's?>Now imagine if an alien put you in between two buns and crushed you to death with its teeth. I think the answer is obvious.Yeah, gonna need some proof for this, chud.
>>24054003"Muh cynicism" and "muh mental illness" don't disprove the logic of an argument. They're cope made by desperate people who know they can't disprove the argument, and are too afraid to admit there might be some truth to it because they know what kind of an existential dread they'd experience if they did.If it's wrong, prove it. Show it without accusing the person of being cynical or depressed.
>>24054005>responding to sarcasm with seriousnessAnon, please.
>>24054032Well said. Sick of these clowns trying to sound like discount Carlyle.
The idea that good is equal to pleasure and bad is equal to pain, is a very primitive value system, more primitive than humans in fact who surpassed it as soon as they embraced things like tattoos or the sun dance.
>>24054040Don’t forget bullet ant initiation rituals.
>>24054045Yes, that too. Pain universally means pain but value judgements of good and bad are quite distinct from that.
>>24054050Non sequitur. Animals can't make use of their pain the way humans do. We have never observed animal initiations. Animal biomass greatly outweighs human biomass. Schopenhauer's point still stands.
>>24054052Not really. Animals would probably be the least receptive to not existing or reproducing as life with great pain, to them, is better than death. Ascribing a positive value to oblivion is a human thing
>>24054068No sequitur, again. He's not talking about antinatalism. He's only saying that suffering outweighs pleasure in quantity and quality. If you'll recall, for Schopenhauer, health is a negative phenomenon and pain is positive.
>>24054073Pain, like pleasure, is a mechanism developed to keep us alive. Where pain consistently outweighs pleasure is simply where the stick has been much more effective at this than the carrot. If Schopenhauer were correct then paradoxically if it were otherwise it would result in more likely extinction.
>>24054075The utility of pain is neither here nor there. Pain is pain.
>>24054077And the worst pain is extreme hunger
>>24054090Nonsense. Dismemberment, immolation, being flayed alive, all manners of torture, etc.
>>24054095When you are the verge of dying of starvation (or thirst) then you will be much less sensible of these
>>24054098Neither would someone on a hunger strike remain aware of their hunger if I doused them gasoline and lit them on fire.
>>24054103Plenty of people have done both as a means of protest. Being set on fire would be short lived as a pain (compared to starvation) because your nerves are destroyed fairly quickly. I think if I could pick any death, it would be that, since the relief from it would coincide with the highest elation. I would much rather go that way than hunger or thirst
>>24054108The destruction of the body wholesale will always be more painful than its slow death.
>>24052116i don't know guys, I quite enjoy jacking it
>>24052116Conputerscience is the only respected intellectual undertaking in 2025
>>24054015I know you kind of morons are really special people so I will spell it out for you: the position isn't discouraging white people to procreate ('whiteness' wasn't even remotely the same concept we have today in Schopenhauer's time), the position is discouraging people to procreate. You're the only one ITT making it a racial thing.>I'm just not taking points on happiness from one of the most well known miserable cunts of all timeYour loss.
>>24053593It exists. But apparently you lack it and that's why you don't understand or don't agree with Op's quote on first reading.
>>24054017Wrong, wrong and no
>>24054201>this isn't discouraging white people from procreation>posts a quote discouraging procreation on a board that is 90% white male ok >your loss I've looked into the eyes of people I love and that love me back, I've won more than Schopenhauer could've written a million pussy sad sack tomes about. You guys are really anti-social freaks sometimes, no wonder art, philosophy and life have completely passed you by.
>>24054463Sympathy is real, empathy as a concept is female hubris. You cannot actually be fully in someone else's shoes.
>>24054603You're probably not even white
>>24052178I get an erection when someone is causing me pain but if I'm experiencing pain caused by no person it might be worse i don't know.A dull consistent pain tends to be excruciating when a sharp and intense pain is over before it began.
>>24054625He's 100% brown.Regardless, /lit/ still hasn't managed to debunk OP.
>>24052116midwit who never heard of masochism
>>24052116>pleasure is never as pleasant as we expectFalse. Shacking up with a cheap hooker and a couple grams of meth is heaven on Earth.
>>24052116>life is pain because well, like, think about a gazelle being eaten by a lion or something bro... do you think he's happy? Why do depressed fags always spend all their time complaining about how life isn't worth living instead of roping?
>>24052116I’ve heard anal sex stings but feels really fucking good.
>>24052116>pleasure is NEVER as pleasant >pain is ALWAYS more painful How would you go about quantifying someone's expectation of pain or pleasure? How would you go about comparing their expectations with their experiences in an objective, measurable manner? Just because you state something as an absolute doesn't automatically make it true.
>>24056065The majority of life is not masochistic.>>24056075They've answered this question countless times already, but you would have to read to know this.>>24056083Sodomy is disgusting and I doubt it feels any good to anybody.>>24056087Read the thread, we've been through this.
Besides it being wrong, the pain of the eaten is also irelevant because it has proven itself to be inferior, it deserves its pain just like the eater deserves its pleasure.
>>24056165Yawn
>>24056146Don't waste your time on these dullards.>>24056165actual nonsense. 4chan lorem ipsum
>>24056165>Besides it being wrongBut it's not wrong. This is just an assertion without evidence.>the pain of the eaten is also irelevant because it has proven itself to be inferior, it deserves its pain just like the eater deserves its pleasure.Naturalistic fallacy.By your own logic, it seems you've proven yourself intellectually inferior, therefore you don't deserve to participate in this discussion. Natural selection of ideas and all that. Better luck next time!
>>24052116The greatest pleasure is the relief one feels when the greatest pain subsides. I had a toothache that would would rise to a ten on the pain scale, hold there, suddenly stop, then start rising again. Those brief, pain free moments were the happiest I've ever been in my entire life. The Cenobites were right.
>>24056189It's possible the death state is the greatest pleasure for following the greatest pain. It's a running theme in NDEs. The happiest, most joyous times of my life was when my heart arrhythmia would spontaneously disappear for weeks at a time.
>>24052116Loser lie that I disprove with every second of my being. My dinner was way tastier than I expected. The weather is not as shit as was promised. My wife loves me way more than the subhuman wectoid media wants people to believe happens in marriage after 15 years. My job is way less shit than zoomers think.Cope seethe and dial 8, loser pessimist cuck shit, lol.Kill yourself, lmao. Oh wait, you can't, pessimist bitch.
>>24056200you're obviously not as happy and fulfilled as you claim to be. your language gives it away
Schopenhauer looks like a chud, speaks like a chud, behaves like a chud. but his philosophy isn't chuddy.
>>24053408That doesn't sound right.
>>24052140why would a doctor shoot you
>>24056204Cope, cuck. My hatred of your subhuman pessimism is magnified by how everything I see in life in antithetical to it. Looser bitch faggot.
>>24056204Of course a statement can't be disproved if you just deny everything that disproves it. It's almost like all you chuds are so miserable and depressed that your defeatist minds cannot fathom an individual being pleased with life, even when it's not all rainbows and sunshine. Life is pain and misery and has no meaning, yet you pessimistic fuckers always find a reason not to end it all. You being alive disproves your entire philosophy.
>>24052116Stop being such a baby
>>24056511you type like an insecure male. many such cases.
>>24056520something something projection
>>24056511>You being alive disproves your entire philosophy.because suicide is an act of will. the only method Schopenhauer endorses is a terminal fast
>>24056189All pleasure is a corollary of pain. Desire is nothing but a form of distress. The more intense the distress one feels, the more blissful the relief. I have found for instance that the most attractive element of meth is that under its influence, every ounce of distress disappears and one is left with prolonged bliss. But continuing to do it reduces the bliss because there is no distress it is in response to, and eventually more distress that can coexist with the meth fills the vacuum. I have also found, like you, that toothache produces the greatest pain so I have reduced one of my molars through intentional decay and apply pressure to the exposed flesh when I desire pain, reducing it gradually. This is nearly ecstasy when combined with sex, bringing the pain to gradually sharper levels and then reducing it all with orgasmYou should watch Ichi the Killer
By that logic humans in the future can simply biologically change themselves through transhumanism or something else to either eliminate suffering or considerably reduce it.
>>24056200>me me me me meCool. You think like an illiterate child. There's still more suffering in the world than pleasure.
>>24056563>There's still more suffering in the world than pleasure.How do you know?
>>24056568inb4 "just think about it bro"
>>24052116Debunk? Debunk what exactly? This is like me asking you to debunk the statement that rocks are actually soft and malleable until the moment they interact with something. It's an impossible phenomenon to test because obviously rocks are in reality always hard. A nonsense statement cannot be debunked because it is nonsense. This statement is true because your belief in it tells you it is true, not because objective reality tells you, therefore it is only possible to debunk if one is capable to make you change your beliefs.
>>24056563Prove it, subhuman insect bitch cuck loser.
>>24056568>>24056574Is this nigga serious? The evidence is literally all around you. Use your fucking eyes and brain for more than a minute. All the wars, exploitation, factory farming, environmental degradation, etc. - these dominate the experiences of the majority of life. The sheer scale of suffering far outweighs isolated moments of pleasure, like having a dead-end job or having sex with your wife or eating chicken tendies and crayons or whatever it is you bragged about. You'd have to be a complete ignoramus not to understand this.
>>24053236>loving your children is demonichuh?
>>24056595see >>24056604Or do I have to draw it using crayons for you?
>>24056593"the pleasure of eating does not outweigh the pain of being eaten" is not equivalent to "rocks are actually soft and malleable". this thread has been the most brutal IQ filter /lit/ has seen in months.
>>24056612I was simply giving another example of a nonsense statement that cannot be disproved. It seems that the only person who got filtered was you.
>>24056604you can even look to your own life - do the brief moments of pleasure really outweigh all the tedium, drudgery, boredom, pain, distress, vague unease, etc.?
>>24056604>>24056609>he evidence is literally all around youIt literally is not. Get wrecked, bitch pessimist loser cuck.Go hang yourself, loser fag. Oh wait, you'\re too pussy to follow up with your logic, bitch faggot loser.
>>24056593>Debunk? Debunk what exactly?Debunk a philosophical observation based on reasoning and evidence drawn from human and animal experience. Unlike your retarded hypothetical about rocks, which defies physical reality, Schopenhauer's statement is grounded in observable phenomena; whether or not you agree with it. It’s a philosophical assessment of patterns in reality that can be critically examined and debated, not something reducible to "changing beliefs" like a matter of faith.
>>24056595Stop being mad, soon transhumanism will turn us all into trannies and we will become extinct in the biggest orgy in history.
>>24056617it's empirically observable. it's not some Russellian teapot. what nonsense.
>>24056621>you can even look to your own lifeGet fucked, faggot pessimist loser bitch: >>24056200
>>24056628Stop squealing like a bitch, loser faggot.
>>24056631oh, you're the absolutely fulminating "bitch loser seethe cuck fag loser", etc retard from the last pessimism thread. disregard.
>>24056634LMAO, fuckface pessimist faggot is crying again.
>>24056636yawn. it pleases me that death will silence you forever one day
>>24056643What pleases me is that your subhuman bitch loser cries serve as a perpetual satellite for the happy lives of everyone around you.Squeal, pig faggot loser.Squeal.
>>24056645"perpetual satellite"? don't attempt literary burns. eat your tendies, fuck your pig wife, and shut the fuck up.
>ask anons to debunk statement >call anyone who tries a dumb, ignorant retard >never engage with anything even remotely related to the original statement >feel very smart and enlightened
>>24056649Awwwww, a bitch faggot loser cuck is mad. It squeals again.Good. Your perpetual suffering is a joy that makes the lives of all normal people better.Squeal, faggot.Squeal.
>>24056623>>24056631Ah, the classic meltdown when reasoning fails... nothing like a string of high school insults to show just how unshaken your worldview really is. Keep going, though; it’s fascinating to watch your grasp on the conversation unravel kek>>24056621My personal experience isn't the point here because Schopenhauer's observation isn't about individual exceptions but the overall balance of suffering and pleasure in the world across all living beings. I haven't suffered much in my life; I don't need to work a boring job, I'm never bored, and I keep to myself, detached from society and its problems. But that doesn’t mean I’m miserable or despairing. I'm pessimistic and cynical, but outwardly, I'm perfectly content. I find positive things in art and nature, and I mind my own business, even while recognizing that life is futile and that there’s far more suffering than pleasure in the world. This isn’t a subjective statement when you consider all living beings, not just humans. Most of the normies I’ve met (who consider themselves optimists) spend more time jealous and complaining than I ever do. The reality is they need to think outside of their own lives. There is more suffering in the world, and that’s an undeniable fact, no matter how good their individual circumstances might be.>>24056612It's actually incredible. These dudes really can't handle the truth, seems like their entire world is shattering. I'm so glad I made this thread.
>>24056656Ah, the classic pessimist bitch faggot cuck squeals when faced with the reality that your loser bitch faggot ideas aren't a concern for anybody actually happy.What's wrong, bitch faggot loser? Can't handle life disproving your shit crying?
>>24056656I know your personal experience isn't the point, but half these mongoloids can't perceive anything that extends past the tip of their nose, so you have to start small. My life is far from tragic, and while I've been extremely miserable sometimes, right now I am mostly content, healthy, and financially free. But it'd be childish of me to assume my experience is a model of everyone else's, especially with regard to the natural world.
>>24056656>the overall balance of suffering and pleasure in the world across all living beingsPROVE IT FAAAAAAAAG! LMAO JUST PROVE THE BALANCE FAGGOT!LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL, bitch faggot loser pessimist.PROVE IT, insect.
>>24056666holy mad
>>24056666quads are profound, terminal retardation. note that he said, "all living beings". do animals live carefree lives full of joy and fulfilment? clearly, they don't. animals outweigh human beings by an enormous margin. QED.
>>24056652I'm not sure you're aware which posts are actually mine (OP) and which aren't. Regardless, I've responded to the extremely few posts that have tried to engage with the argument meaningfully. On the other hand, the majority of posts ITT have been outright dismissive and aggressive, so in those cases, I've simply mirrored that tone and given it back.
>>24056668>>24056671>No proofPROVE IT, passimist bitch fag.COME OOOOOOOOON, insect maggot cuck shitface.PROVE IT
>>24056676lost
>>24056674>I'm against all life>Why are people laughing at me?LMAO, loser fuckface.
>>24056664You're absolutely right, yeah.>half these mongoloids can't perceive anything that extends past the tip of their noseCase in point: this guy having an absolute meltdown ITT after two posts, kek
>>24056679the attitude implied in the OP presupposes a compassion for life. schopenhauer loved animals.
>>24056687Compassion of a pessimist subhuman who wants to eradicate all life is worth less than nothing.
>>24056664Genuine question: what exactly is the point of this statement? Is it supposed to be just a general statement of reality to which I reply "yeah, there is a lot of suffering in the world"? Or does it carry a greater implication about life itself?
>>24056702I was clarifying why I asked you (?) to apply this formula to your own life. I don't understand what the confusion is.
>>24056652>shart out something that can be easily de-debunked>"Yeah, I am so smart"
Schopenhauer lived for several decades after that, took care of his health but used to drink fine wine in moderation, had at least 2 daughters, never went vegetarian and did support charity and other efforts to improve society plus thought competition and awards were fun.So what is the point? Other than avoiding marriage he lived a normal life.
>>24056994He's grifting. The Greeks called them Sophists.
>>24056994I don't have the slightest interest in modelling my life after Schopenhauer's. He was a pale spark thrown off Mahavira that landed in the occident - but a spark, nonetheless.
>>24052116cuán presto se va el placer;cómo después de acordadoda dolor;cómo a nuestro parecercualquiera tiempo pasadofue mejor.
>>24056994That someone does not live or do something according to his philosophy does not refute his philosophy
>>24056702NTA but you could ask "What's the point of this statement?" in relation to any philosophical quote/assumption. Not every idea needs to justify itself in terms of practical outcome. Schopenhauer's statement, as well as any philosophical insight, is about deepening our understanding of life in this world. Whether or not it provides a clear answer doesn't diminish its value in prompting us to reflect on our own lives and beliefs. Isn’t the point of philosophy to explore these kinds of questions, even if the answers aren't always neat and convenient?>>24056709>I was clarifying why I asked you (?)I'm >>24056656 >>24056686 and I agree with you, so someone else is asking you that.
>>24057036>I'm >>24056656 >>24056686 and I agree with you, so someone else is asking you that.I figured, you could have fried an egg with the snark radiating off that post. I don't get his question. the buddhists believe samsara is permanently in the red, the vast majority of beings languish in suffering and if you don't believe in hell realms it's still true that for every one (1) human being there are two million ants toiling for survival. nevermind the jain nigodas. of course it carries a "greater implication about life itself", are people this afraid of admitting their relatively comfy lives are an anomaly?
>>24056606Luke 14:16If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
Schopenhauer? More like COPEnhauer. What a bitch. Didn't get what he wanted out of life and chewed those sour grapes til the end.
>>24052116Don't cry because it happened, smile because it's over.
>>24052116The logical conclusion of all this pessimistic faggotry is roping your sorry ass. Joy triumphs over pain, beauty defeats ugliness. There's no point to arguing, there’s no debate to begin with. Life-affirmer doesn’t have to lift a finger to argue with a life-denier. Denier’s creed implodes under its own weight. If life sucks so much, how come you keep clinging to it?
>>24057098>There's no point to arguing,Not with that attitude
>>24056061How does the grass feel compared to the deer?
>>24057098>Joy triumphs over pain, beauty defeats ugliness. >Written by someone absolutely seethingpoetic.
>>24057098Oh look, another one of these.Dismissing a whole philosophy because it makes you uncomfortable isn't an argument, it’s just emotional outbursts from someone too afraid to actually think about the topic. You can keep pretending there’s no debate, but if you’re so sure that life’s all sunshine and rainbows, why does it bother you so much when someone else doesn’t share your delusion?Regardless, Schopenhauer and other pessimistic philosophers already addressed the suicide question, so don’t act like it’s some kind of convenient escape. Their point is: it's not the answer, because it's not about escaping life; it’s about confronting its inherent suffering.
>>24057190If you die you’re not suffering. Unless you’re arguing they believe in some sort of hell. It seems like a very convenient escape otherwise. Also, how does the grass feel compared to the deer?
>>24057188i know you don't even believe this yourself, anon>>24057190Discussing this topic is fun, for the same reason discussing all kinds of topics is fun - that's our wordcel element. If you insist on a self-undermining creed, don't complain if i point finger and mock you>but if you’re so sure that life’s all sunshine and rainbowsNot my argument. I claim that my suffering has meaning and my life - inherent value. >Their point is: it's not the answer, because it's not about escaping life; it’s about confronting its inherent suffering.That's your best copeout? lmaoI can of course see the merits of seriously grappling with the problem of suffering, but for fuck's sake, I implore you to not at least not be a whiny fag about it. And if your ultimate conclusion is 'life is not worth living' then follow through it, do the rest of us a favor, and spare us from your presence.
>>24057098>Joy triumphs over painEven if this were true (which it certainly isn't) Schopenhauer would continue to win.>beauty defeats uglinessIf you think chinks and pajeets are attractive, sure
>>24057225>i know you don't even believe this yourself, anonCope, seethe, dilate, etc.You clearly aren't interested in any attempt at intelligent discussion, just screeching, whining, bitching and telling anons to kill themselves.Probably a christcuck.
>>24057472The suicide argument is a pretty good one even though I don’t want you to kill yourself. You’ve been making the argument not that life is just barely not worth starting but is actually incredibly bad. A lot of pessimists have a response to that but I don’t find it convincing, most are akin to the sunk cost fallacy.
>>24057472Nice confession through accusation you have there. I added some rhetorical flair, but there's a still specific argument included. All you produced is a tempter tantrum.
>>24057483I actually really don’t want you to kill yourself. If you’re actually feeling that way please get off the internet and talk to irl people.
i think it's a prerogative of men to kill themselves if they want to, but it better not be for some lame reason like feeling sad but more like suicide to preserve dignity, as a sacrifice, out of spite, etc.
>>24057483>The suicide argument is a pretty good oneAre you referring to the argument that says: “If life is so bad, why don't you kill yourself?”It seems to me one of the silliest "arguments" against pessimism, as if the person in question doesn't understand pessimism at all. I mean one of the reasons life sucks is because we survive. Also, death is a part of life ergo suicide is just another reason life sucks.
>I mean one of the reasons life sucks is because we survivedon't survive then mate, is someone holding you in a cell with soft walls forcing you to prolong your misery?
>>24057545I think one of the reasons why people like you don't understand pessimism at all is because pessimism speaks in general/moral terms. And since you can't see beyond your ass, when someone says "Life sucks" you assume they're speaking in individual terms. Kill yourself retard
>>24052116>compare the respective feelings of two animals, one of which is eating the otherThis doesn't prove that pain outweighs pleasure, it only proves that the pain of that particular subject outweighs the pleasure of this other particular subject in that particular scenario. It's entirely possible that the overall pleasure of the prey was greater than that of the predator over the course of their lifetimes, or that it was lesser, or that it was equal, or that the pleasure was greater, or that the pain was greater, or that it was all equal and adds up to 0. It's impossible to make calculations like this.
>>24053081>physical phenomena is measured using the exact same human senses that "subjective experiences" are measured withThe eye that observes simultaneities between a timer and a falling object and the brain that feels such emotions as fear and pain under circumstances are not operating on the same order of distinctness. The eye inscribes precise evidence, because the clarity of visual reporting is very high. Nociception, on the other hand, often has very unclear reporting because it is hard to inscribe the presence of pain on a recording surface.This is a very surprising angle for you to argue, as it is intuitively very retarded. But I commend you for trying.
>>24057560Do you mean to say that it sucks for everyone on average, but for every given pessimist still living or decreased by external or natural causes it does not?
we can also choose to simply...not anchor our definition of "suck" in pain
>>24057543If non existence is better than existence why is death bad? Shouldn’t you logically put yourself in the state of non existence if life is suffering?If you want to continue living when the option of non existence is right there it seems like there are things that make life worth living. Or are you the one exception to the rule?
>>24052116this is like the type of thought you have when you're 17 in a bout of depression thinking you figured out some deep dark truth about the world and then you go outside and realize you were retarded. yes I am speaking from experience.
>>24057605But someone else is suffering somewhere, so your positive experience is invalidated.
>>24057578>why would human sensory perception be completely reliable for numerical measurements, but completely unreliable for the "subjective experience" of physical pain?you still haven't answered the question>The eye inscribes precise evidence, because the clarity of visual reporting is very high.how? you have explained nothing
>>24052116Despite the pain and hardship, there's always something that makes it worth it, if you come to terms with that, the pain isn't so bad
>>24057604Lmao death is not the same as non-existence. >If you want to continue living when the option of non existence is right there it seems like there are things that make life worth living. Or are you the one exception to the rule?The problem with this is that it doesn't make sense because you speak in individual terms and ignore the damage we do to stay alive. The damage done + the damage received makes pessimism say that life is not worth living. Ignoring that damage just doesn't make sense.
>>24057653Okay.Please continue, what makes your life worth it, in individual terms?
>>24057666Now I understand why Benatar doesn't answer the personal questions. What is the point when talking about morality? Kill yourself Satan
>>24057560Death is the same as non existence unless we’re taking the supernatural into account. You can argue that dying is different sure, but theres plenty of ways to painlessly kill yourself. Please don’t btw. The reason why I think death is bad is because I think existence is good. >The problem with this is that it doesn't make sense because you speak in individual terms and ignore the damage we do to stay alive. The damage done + the damage received makes pessimism say that life is not worth living. Ignoring that damage just doesn't make sense.This strikes me as a disparate argument. And one I addressed before. Does the grass feel agony when munched by the deer? It seems perfectly possible to live a life that does more good then bad, and has more pleasure then pain. This doesn’t deny the experience or existence of life’s not worth living but puts the onus on you to prove that the vast majority of lives shouldn’t be lived, excluding yours.
>>24057687>Death is the same as non existenceNo
>>24057686Because it’s a flaw in your arguments. If a man told me that doing a certain thing was absolutely the right and good thing to do but he wasn’t doing it personally I would be suspect. You have the option not to leave the party, why are you staying? The fact that you’ve been accusing others of ignoring your points without addressing this one feels like projection
>>24056245I feel like it's the opposite, his philosophy makes it looks like nothing is worth a shit and he said it's ok to be a loser because life is pointless but he lived like a chad fucking a lot of hot women, being cool and charismatic having friends, going all over the world, enjoying good food, trying to have a family(his daughter died though) etc
>>24057692So you believe in existence after death?
>>24057696Pessimism seeks to reduce suffering and, if possible, end it with extinction (our extinction is inevitable, btw). Which has to do with the damage caused, but you decide to ignore it and simply focus on the damage received so you misinterpret things and create strawmen that are easy to destroy. Faggot
>>24057651Those plants won't like it when they die.
>>24057686My fucking sides I graciously accept your concession.>Kill yourself But why? I love being alive!
>>24057727'Cause you are literally Satan. But you'll die anyway, so...
>>24057719Well then, by finally roping yourself you reduce both damage done to you and by you to zero.Or do you want to argue that a more ambitious action is due, like duty of a Buddha to help out lesser being but in reverse?School shootings I can't endorse, please limit your practical philosophy to yourself
>>24057720Everything dies, that's just a fact of life
>>24057741But...im not a pessimist...
>>24052140A shot at the doctor? Was she hot? Are we talking about hot doctors right now?
>>24057742It is not true because suicide causes harm to loved ones. There are many ways to reduce and even avoid suffering but the least one can do is not have children. Murder just causes more senseless harm, there might be a scenario where it might be permissible but other than that nah
>>24057719Do you have any idea how that sounds to the average person? You are basically saying that you want to destroy the world, like a supervillain or some shit.
>>24052116>the pleasure of eating a meal should be the inverse of the pain of being eaten alive>pain and pleasure is a one-dimensional spectrumthis is some jordan peterson level retardation
>>24057719Why should I just be focused on reducing suffering and not and minimize suffering and maximizing pleasure?
>>24057786Well I guess if some rich pedophile from Hollywood, says it bad, then there is nothing we can do but concede the argument.
>>24057483>>24057494Astonishing, two posts and 400+ characters to say"ur wrong.lol"
>>24057754Optimists don't live forever
>>24057819Your accusations of others ignoring things they can’t refute is clearly projection now. Your argument hinges on nonexistence being better yet you choose to continue existing.
>>24057823I'm not sure but I think that a large part of optimists believe that they will have eternal life if they behave like their sky daddy ordered them
>>24057829>Your argument hinges on nonexistence being better yet you choose to continue existing.Yes and?Being a hypocrite doesn't refute the basis of my argument.Preaching virtue while being wicked does not make virtue any less virtuous
>>24057819We're not even the same anon.I'm the evil one endorsing you rope yourself.I rarely use this language, even if it's difficult to believe, but this is like the sole special topic where this is a legitimate response, I can't help but indulge myself
>>24057842It does make it a lot less convincing, especially when you’re making the argument that it’s the better state. You’re like a cult leader who refuses to drink his own Koolaide while ordering others to, why should we?
>>24057846>It does make it a lot less convincing, especially when you’re making the argument that it’s the better state. This is nothing more than an form of ad hominem.Pathetic really.
>>24052116Boo hoo nigga
>>24057843Yes I’m the other anon and I don’t want you to kill yourself. I see a lot of my younger self in you and want you to be happy. You’re like those people who see themselves as super rational and logical because feelings are for stupid women, so they think their negative feelings are not actually feelings at all, but objective facts. In their minds, distracting themselves from their negative emotions is distracting themselves from reality.And again, they think feelings are stupid, so they’re never gonna go out do their way to learn about mental and emotional health.
>>24057853It’s not ad hominem? Ad hominem would be saying that “you’re dumb and your argument fails because you’re dumb” Asking “why isn’t the snake oil salesman drinking his snake oil” is a fairly good counter.
>>24052374This was painful to see at first glance, but then I imagined the author of this post raging with saliva coming out of his mouth like a dog, then I became satisfied with the amount of joy and pleasure (that I gained by laughing at this thoughtful scenario), which exceeded my pain. Does this debunk OP?
>>24057687>implying that pleasure is goodngmi
>>24057859>>24057857Neither of you have addressed the heart of the issue, the overabundance of pain in contrast to pleasure.
>>24057871Because I don’t think he’s successfully argued that point. Yes I’m sure that the rabbit getting eaten’s pain outweighs the wolf’s pleasure, but does the grasses pain outweigh the rabbit? Does the entire rabbits life’s pleasure outweigh its pain? Is it more, less, or equal then the wolves? It's impossible to make calculations like this.I think for most human beings, with certain exceptions, live lives that were worth living. But I accept that some lives aren’t worth starting. >>24057869Pleasure is good.
>>24057871We’re making the argument that life does have pleasures that outweigh the pain so we keep living. He’s arguing it does not but hasn’t provided a cogent explanation for why he wants to continue existing.
>>24057871I will simply refuse to equate pain and pleasure to evil and good.In the future, I will see to it that a VR set gets bolted to your skull and cocaine added to the caloric slop on which you will subsist while you mine uranium on distant moons
>>24052116I like that. Is the rest of his work like that or is he faggy?
>>24057885>We’re making the argument that life does have pleasures that outweigh the pain so we keep living.There is no evidence behind this claim.
>>24057898Is the fact that the vast majority of people agree with it not sufficient evidence, including the elderly?
>>24057903desu most people are just cowards so it's a noisy metric
>>24057903Ad populum, tranny
>>24057905Maybe, or maybe you have jade colored glasses. >>24057911Yes, pessimism is totally not a philosophy popular with trannys
>>24057878>Le It's impossible to calculateI don't know about you retards. But if all my life I had the greatest pleasure of all time and ultimately an ideal life according to all my preferences and selfish desires but my final destiny was that I was going to be eaten by a lion like he eats the average moose. I consider that my life would not have been worth it at all, have you ever suffered any serious physical pain? Getting/receiving pleasure doesn't matter at all, avoiding pain does.
>>24057934Actually I have experienced real pain, extreme infection in the jaw as well as being mauled by a Pitbull once. I totally would consider the perfect life that ended by being eaten by a lion worth it. How old even are you?
>>24057934>>24057941Your pleasure doesn't matter on a moral level. Kill yourself
>>24057941>I totally would consider the perfect life that ended by being eaten by a lion worth it.I don't believe you
>>24057947Why not? >>24057949Or maybe you’re just wrong?
>>24057878>I think for most human beings, with certain exceptions, live lives that were worth living.Well you're wrong, it's quite the opposite, but don't worry. Benatar showed that people are not able to judge if their lifes are worth it due to a psychological bias, that people's lives are worse than they imagine and that no life is worth starting but hey that does not mean that all lives are not worth continuing despite how shit they are. So it's not your fault.
>>24057953Why would it matter morally how much pleasure you receive every time cocks enter your ass?
>>24052194he just didnt read your replay correctlywhich never stops people from forming very decisive views of your take regardlesswelcome to the internet
>>24057957That’s also wrong, depressive realism is heavily contested in psychology. Theres also some evidence of the opposite, that people have a negativity bias. Have you considered that your mental illness is clouding your thinking? https://web.archive.org/web/20111119145439/http://www.radford.edu/%7Ejaspelme/_private/gradsoc_articles/Depressive%20Realism/Are_the_sadder_wiser.pdf
>>24057960Why would pain of the cock matter either?
>>24057970>depressive realismLol wrong bias. Nobody said anything about depressive realism
>>24057974Morally speaking no
>>24057977You seem to also ignore the existence negativity bias? As in people think they’re doing worse than they actually are. How do you square that away?
>>24052993>>24054005Yeah but that's not what's contextually relevant to humans which is where this perspective has relevance. It's a dumb analogy for this reason, in reality, typically, a cow is shot in the head (and before then beheaded) and at most is concious for 5 seconds if it didn't instantly remove them from such and is then deceased and then that sustains 40 meals that are delicious. Clearly, in such a case joy outweighs the negative on a purely sensual level.
>>24057985>You seem to also ignore the existence negativity bias? Tell me about them then?
>>24057985>>24057997Depression is rightly considered a negative bias. Benatar briefly mentions that there are studies that could show that these negative biases could sometimes help us be more precise in making more precise views of the world. And among them he mentions depressive realism.
>>24057997https://lirias.kuleuven.be/retrieve/17485People remember negative stimuli more than positive. With respect to positive and negative gradients, it appears to be the case that negative events are thought to be perceived as increasingly more negative than positive events are increasingly positive the closer one gets (spatially or temporally) to the affective event itself. In other words, there is a steeper negative gradient than positive gradient. Which is in fact also evidence against the OP. https://doi.org/10.1207%2FS15327957PSPR0504_2
>>24058012True, but there’s also plenty of evidence that depression makes people less accurate. The effect is also only seen in a people with minor depression.
>>24057800>the pleasure of eating a meal should be the inverse of the pain of being eaten aliveDon't he have a good reason for giving that example? The ephemeral and tiny pleasure that the predator usually obtains from the slow torture of its prey. As for a fair comparison... Cancer exists, that can last for years in agony. What is the cancer of pleasure? There is nothing like it. Pain wins
>>24054018>get a shot, painless deaths, ect . . . That's not how nature fundamentally operates retard. Animals need meat to survive and they take that from other living animals by force, and it hurts very badly.
>>24056604there is no showing them the light anon, just leave it. knowing is a curse anyway
>>24058076Yea I’m sure the leaf is devastated when it’s eaten
LMAO the cuckenhauer bitch keeps squealing stillHEY FAAAAAAAGPROVE IT BITCH LOSERLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL
>>24057993The original point was about the disparity in intensity between suffering and pleasure, which applies universally, including to humans. As for factory farming, claiming it creates more pleasure than suffering is either profoundly ignorant or outright callous. The "5 seconds of consciousness" ignores the extended suffering animals endure in crowded, stressful, and often cruel conditions leading up to the slaughter. Those "40 meals" might give brief pleasure to those consuming them, but that doesn't negate the immense suffering inflicted on the animal for its entire life. Framing this as a net positive is a grim miscalculation of what suffering truly entails.
>>24057993the pain spike of being shot in the head, however brief, doesn't outweigh 40 pleasurable but ultimately forgettable meals. we should factory farm retards like you.
Suffering and pleasure have no moral content. It is possible to be indifferent towards either coming or going
>>24058372after a lifetime of effort and meditation, maybe. don't you have a stove in your house? show us how it's done. the "pessimists should kill themselves because nyah" has its counterpart in "if suffering is a matter of indifference, place your palm on a red-hot stove for five (5) seconds"
>>24057208You're either misunderstanding or deliberately ignoring the philosophical reasoning behind why Schopenhauer and others don't advocate for suicide as a "solution" to life's suffering. Suicide doesn't address the fundamental issue and it doesn't change the broader truth about life's nature. You're reducing the argument to a simplistic notion, which misses the point entirely.>how does the grass feel compared to the deer?False equivalence. Plants don't have a nervous system, pain requires consciousness, which plants obviously lack. The consensus is that while plants can "respond" to being cut or eaten by releasing chemicals (like defense mechanisms), that's entirely different to the way animals experience suffering. There's a big difference between reflexive actions of plants and the conscious pain experienced by sentient beings. Equating plant responses to animal suffering is not only scientifically inaccurate, but is just a way to dismiss or deflect ethical concerns about factory farming and animal welfare.
>>24058380if you had an opportunity to destroy mankind, would you take it?
>>24058363However animals are incapable of suffering as they are merely automatons with no souls. Descartes said so and you cannot disprove him.
>>24058383this thread truly has been the most brutal iq filter /lit/ has seen in a decade
>>24057225It's fascinating that you claim your suffering has meaning and your life inherent value, yet here you are, spending your valuable time telling people to kill themselves. A real beacon of life-affirming wisdom.Anyway, to address your "arguments": I suppose when your counterarguments boil down to "lmao", anything thoughtful will seem like a copout. Mockery isn’t a rebuttal; it’s just your way of dodging a real discussion. Suicide isn't a solution and it doesn't address the fundamental issue and it doesn't change the broader truth about life.
>>24058383no man, you don't understand, they have nervous system, lots of neurons and stuff, that means they totally have subjective experience
>>24058393>animals are inanimate objectsfarcical
>>24058394ughhh....source??
>>24058382You're either trying to point out a contradiction or shift the focus from the original argument. In any case, it's a loaded question/a bit of a trap and doesn't really address the issue at hand. The point isn’t about destroying humanity, but about trying to understand and deal with the nature of suffering. I believe in reducing harm whenever possible, but I also think murder and destruction are wrong. My values don't allign with this hypothetical.>>24058383So we're going with Descartes? Bold move, considering how much we've learned since then. I'm sure that's the most reliable way to approach ethics in the modern world.
>>24058398I can't tell whose mocking who anymore. I'll just say that there is and has always been a categorical difference between living and non-living things, and that if it has a nervous system, it has phenomenal experience at some resolution. The proof is self-evident. Besides, how could you account for the success we've had in hacking the behaviours of some bird species with supernormal stimuli if they weren't able to distinguish between qualia? Even slime molds demonstrate a rudimentary form of intelligence.>b-but GPTdon't backread technology into the natural world, it makes you look like a dork
>>24058393>>24058400The purpose of suffering is to bring us closer to God. Animals have no souls and therefore cannot come closer to God, therefore animals cannot suffer.QED
>>24058393Ah yes, my mistake. Clearly animals' nervous systems, neurons, and brain structures (those pesky little things) totally have no bearing on their ability to feel pain, fear, or joy. I'm sure can all hide behind a flawed historical perspective and simply not engage with the actual argument. That'll show them!
>>24058403if it has a sensory system, it suffers. or at least experiences pain, if you want to split hairs. this is why the dharmic religions are more ethically advanced than christianity
>>24058405No, it doesn't suffer. It's an automaton, it responds to stimuli by instinct but doesn't feel anything. This idea comforts me greatly, because I would be monstrous in my treatment of animals otherwise.
>>24058405 Give me a chip, sensors, mechanical legs and cheap speakers, and I will assemble a robot that will clumsily run away and beg for mercy when you poke it with a stick. Behold, a moral agent!
>>24058406masterbaiter or demonic retard. choose.
>>24058407>I can simulate lifelike behavior, ergo all behaviors are simulated>calculators exist, so people can't do math in their headsthe absolute state of this board.
>>24058403>QEDRelying heavily on an outdated perspective/specific religious framework that isn't universally accepted is, in fact, not self-evident.
>>24058400>You're either trying to point out a contradiction or shift the focus from the original argument.Not quite. It's just another question that only has one coherent answer within the constrains of your beliefs, and it sounds totally unhinged. That's why I asked it to watch you dodge it and squirm. I'm satisfied.
>>24058408>>24058411The existence of the human soul is self evident. The existence of God is self evident. Everything else follows from this. There can be no mistreatment of animals, for they are not made in the image of God. You know this, which is why you wear clothes to cover your shame, while animals rut in full view of others and wallow in their own filth in the sty we lock them in.
>>24058407Robots can be programmed to mimic reactions, but they don't actually experience pain or suffering. But nice try!
>>24058416>just double down and have nothing interesting to sayyawn. my last (you)
>>24058418Isn't it funny how you recognize instantly that the robot is not actually experiencing anything, but then the flesh automaton appears to you as genuine when it is just as fake?
>>24058416Schopenhauer's philosophy is perfectly compatible with the existence of souls and God. It's not limited to the material world, but extends to a deeper metaphysical level. What you're doing is simply using your theological framework to dodge the real argument because it's extremely inconvenient for you.
>>24058388well, if you insist on continuing, don't expect me to let you slip away from the (again, not insulting, but very relevant!) questions I'm asking. Why is it not a solution? It is a solution for you. Unless you believe your own life has positive value? Or perhaps you feel the duty to make more of an impact? if you could take us all with you, would you?
>>24058410Yeah, I'm done here too. I'm going to check back in a few hours to see where this thread is heading, but this one guy doubling down on some outdated nonsense and a flimsy theological framework got boring really quick. This thread has absolutely filtered /lit/ kek
>>24058410Ok, but how do we know what is and isn't simulated?>>24058418imagine thinking this was some epic own. I am now pulling the card "assert that animals are also just simulating reactions" Your response?
>>24058429go to bed.>>24058427threads like these always do. been seeing these non-arguments knocking around since 2015, and there's a constellation of subjects that always brings them out of the woodwork: veganism, gnosticism, christopher mccandless, pessimism in general, anti-tech, anti-civ, and so on. i'm tired of it.
Okay but can we all at least admit that there is no proof animals can experience sensory stimulus and that therefore it is ridiculous to believe that they can feel, see, hear, smell or taste anything?Until we all agree on this, this conversation is fruitless.
>>24058434>animals can't sense sensations>there's such a thing as an unfelt feelingthe absolute STATE of this board kek
>>24058436I was hoping to be blatant enough that everyone would see it was a joke but I guess it still looked too much like a retard being serious
>>24058440>I guess it still looked too much like a retard being seriousYes it absolutely did lol, no different from the previous replies, but good one
>>24058440I'm sorry, but Poe's Law was invented for discussions like this.
>>24058442Him trying to get everyone on the same page with such blatant retardation was a good tell, but still. You really can't tell
i'm sorry guys, i was in a coma for...a long time. I heard that a reliable method of determining what kind of complex systems have subjectivity has dropped. Directions, please?
>>24058448your eyes, and a soul. mileage may vary.
>>24058449oh, so i have a soul know? nice i was led to believe it's all about electrical interactions in a chunk of meat and stuff
>>24058402>The proof is self-evident.No, it's not.
>>24058440
>>24058453>organism is in clear signs of distress>it's not, actuallyretard
>>24058402>Even slime molds demonstrate a rudimentary form of intelligence.intelligence is necessary but not sufficient for subjective experience. We can fashion a machine simulating arbitrary behavior, how do we know when it gains a soul? is it substrate? complexity threshold? number of neurons? What if I have a PC with vast computational capacity and have it...count primes? what I re-implement it on meat instead of transistors? > The proof is self-evidentnvm, you really got me now
>>24058455>ChatGPT must be scared because it told me soFucking midwit.
>>24058463Comparing chat gpt to biological organisms. Sad state of affairs.
>>24058426>Why is it not a solution? NTA but because it does not reduce or end the world's suffering (which pessimism seeks) but only end mine.>It is a solution for you. Even if I did, it still does not reduce or end the world's suffering (which pessimism seeks) but only ends mine. >Unless you believe your own life has positive value? I believe that all sentient lives (morally speaking) have an immeasurably negative value. >if you could take us all with you, would you?Obviously yes because that does end the suffering of the world.
>>24058454Anon come on.
>>24058635at least you bit that bullet like trooper still, wdym it doesn't reduce world's suffering? is it about consequences for your social circle?
>>24058788Not everything is about you or your tribe. You killing youself won't change the fact that, for example, Africa is a 3rd world shithole stricken with hunger, poverty, and wars, or that thousands upon thousands experience human trafficking every day.
>>24058803that was just my best guess. Then we are back to the start. No matter what we consider virtue, virtuous action is not diminished by no solving literally everything at once. Then I'm guessing you deem suicide as not impactful enough, preventing you from reducing negative utilons any farther?Presumably you're doing something a lot more daring. Like, idk, implementing TND bit by bit on your tourist trips, that's why you decided to suffer through all this negative value you will keep producing for decades.
>>24058803Are you doing very much to stop African slavery now?
>>24058380So you admit there’s pleasures not based on suffering then.
>>24058788Lmao why do you think suicide reduces the suffering of the world, retard? With that logic, shooting up a school would be a morally good thing
>>24058857>Lmao why do you think suicide reduces the suffering of the world, retardI don't. But assuming your life has net negative value, it does
>>24058857Because it doesn’t seem like you’re doing anything to reduce the suffering of the world now and you yourself said your life has negative value. Especially when you yourself said you wanted to take everyone with you, I fail to see how that’s much better then a school shooter.Unless you’re actually doing stuff like stopping slavery or predation.
>>24058861>If life is bad then death, suicide and murder are goodNo>>24058868>Slavery or predation.Not my problem
>>24058932So then you should end your life? I don’t want you to be it seems to be the only logically consistent thing to do. You’re saying that life is a net negative, and you’re not doing anything to make life overall less negative for everyone, so you should end it for yourself.
>>24058936I am not obliged to make what I believe a practical reality, no one is.
>>24058936>Help a nigger from slavery>People you helped reduce their suffering: +1>The nigger proceeds to have 20 children because of youIt's over
>>24058956You’re saying this is the ideal state though? If somebody says X is better but they refuse to do X why should I believe them?!
>>24058967I floated the idea of personal TND crusade, but I'm yet to receive a response.
>>24058978>You do nothing to reduce suffering, therefore there is no reason to believe in pessimism!Anon, be honest even if I did something about it, you would still not believe in pessimism
>>24059025I would be more inclined to believe it if you followed through. In the same way I’d be more inclined to believe the snake oil salesman if he drank the snake oil
>>24059028The fact that I don't do anything to reduce suffering, such as something against slavery, doesn't refute pessimism.
>>24059049sure. None of us are moral paragons whatever our morals are. let's talk about 'should's.Do you recognize your duty to instantiate TND (and THD in more generally) to the degree you're capable off? Also, if you have arrived at a conclusion that you're not going to do that for whatever reason, the least you can do is, again, suicide.
>>24059049Your excuse for not committing suicide was the fact that it doesn’t reduce worldwide suffering, if you’re not doing that anyways then you have no excuse. You’re the one saying that your life is a net negative. If so, why do you insist on continuing it?
>>24059055>Also, if you have arrived at a conclusion that you're not going to do that for whatever reason, the least you can do is, again, suicide?Why? I am not obligated to reduce suffering, much less commit suicide for not reducing suffering.
it's hard to tell in a place like this, but methinks somewhere during this conversation the old pessimist got sick of our shit and left, and another couple SDs dumber took his spot
>>24059075I don’t get why this is so hard for you to understand. You’re saying that non existence is a better state than existence because life is constant suffering and a net negative. If you really believe that true why wouldn’t you kill yourself? Your excuse of “this won’t reduce overall world suffering” doesn’t work because you’re not doing that anyways. It’s like somebody telling me that it’s really amazing to live in New Jersey and everyone should be there while simultaneously refusing to move there.
>>24059067>REEEEEE you should commit suicide because I have the mistaken belief that pessimism says that death, suicide and murder are goodNo thanks
>>24059088so your ideology is entirely toothless and separated from any irl conclusions by a watertight barrier. thanks for clearing this up
>>24059085>Nonexistence = deathFiltered
>>24059088You’re the one saying that non existence is better? If coming into existence is bad then why is coming out of it not good?
>>24059095Explain the difference? Are you saying you believe in hell?
>>24059085>>24059099>>24059106>He doesn't knowNgmi
>>24053003>Quantify it. Without quantification everything is relativedurr hurr
>>24059106>Are you saying you believe in hell?We are in hell
>>24059127Then why not kill yourself?
Retards who ask pessimists to kill themselves were not only filtered but they are the cucks who would kill the guy who fucked his wife before his wife or both
what a strange thing to say
>>24059140>Cucks who kill themselves rather than kill their wife, the guy who fucked her or bothFtfy
>>24059135Because this is not Christian hell, it is one mim times worse
>>24059135and what would that accomplish retard, other than demotion to a lower circle?
>375 resplies>0 debunkingsSchoppybros we won again
>0 answers to suicide questionsat least I got one guy to admit he wants to destroy everything that exists, the rest of you are whiny, cowardly wordcel cucks
>>24059194nah. you fags got schooled
>>24059230Feels like you’re coping
>>24059235one of you compared animals to chat gpt. I'm certifiably not coping
>>24059194>one guy to admit he wants to destroy everything that existsLiterally all pessimists want that but they don't even have to lift a finger for it to happen, it's inevitable
>>24059246You never responded to the negativity bias comment which seems to be a direct contradiction to multiple of your statements and the OP. Cope
>>24059254but when you suggest they actually act on it the response is "nuh uh"
>>24059254So if ending it quicker doesn’t matter what’s the problem with having kids?
>>24059259Where did I say that? Of course it matters, the fewer people have children the fewer victims there will be
>>24059254So if it did go on forever you’d like life? Even despite all the suffering?
>>24059279Yes but eventually, by your logic, they’ll die to so no problem?
>>24059256NTA but you also did not refute Benatar's bias which based on ample evidence shows that Op's quote is true
>>24059283Yes I did, I showed both evidence against depressive realism and how the negativity bias has more ample evidence than the positive one.
>>24059194Most of us have enough common sense to realize we can't just walk into a military base and start launching its nuclear missiles, you tard, and if it is possible, I'm sure those Atomwaffen fellas are going to do it for us anyway.
>>24059294So if you can’t do that why not just end yourself? Why do you want to continue living?
>>24059280>So if it did go on forever you’d like life? No, quite the opposite>>24059281No, you're putting words in my mouth. What I said was that even if the pessimists did nothing, it's something inevitable. They will have the last laugh
>>24059307I don’t think they would, I’d prefer to have loved and lost than never loved at all. The pessimist has already lost because people have lived.
>>24059304I read them and I think Benatar has more evidence and was more convincing.
>>24059317Alright, post the specific studies Benatar quoted.
i'm going to live forever and i'm going to love it. i will experience every conceivable thought and sensation, greedily seizing both pain and joy in a spiral of transmigration, scaling limitless height until, one eternity from now, I'm a God
>>24059311>I don’t think they would, I’d prefer to have loved and lost than never loved at all.Gay>The pessimist has already lost because people have lived.True but at least it will end which shows that even if we live in hell. It's not the worst possible hell
>>24059323No
>>24059339 >True but at least it will end which shows that even if we live in hell. It's not the worst possible hellLet me predicate this with the fact that I don’t want you to kill yourself. But don’t you see that your logic implies you should? Why shouldn’t you speed up the end if life is so bad?
>>24059346Based.
>>24059348When a pessimist says that life is bad, he speaks in general terms. My life is fine, I don't have cancer or anything. Why should I commit suicide? But the world is not just one person. There are millions of animals and people suffer like bitches every day. And it is because of them that it is not worth living
>>24059373Because that changes your argument? Wouldn’t it then be ethical to have children if they have a life like yours? I guess unless you’re saying that other beings suffering would then make your life worthless?
>>24059379My life may be fine until the end but I will die. I think the evils of death are reason enough not to have children.
imagine twisting yourself in pretzels, moving goalposts, throwing every rhetorical trick at the wall because you chose to stick for an for ideology that undermines itself. At least building sand castles before a rising tide requires going outside
>>24059387What’s so bad about dying? It’s just not existing right?
>>24059393>It’s just not existing right?No. Also following your retarded logic, have you started to think that it makes more sense for pessimists to tell (you) to kill yourself since you are potentially more harmful than them? Or that they kill many people to spare them suffering? Asking them to commit suicide is like the last thing they should do
>>24059408Explain the difference between being dead and not existing.
>>24059410>Believes himself worthy of criticizing pessimism>Is not even able to find the difference between never existing and coming to exist and then dying
>>24059416If existing is bad why would leaving existence also be a bad thing?
>>24059417Because we don't want to pander to your confirmation bias
>>24059416What is the meaningful difference?
>>24059423Existence
>>24059422You seem to be unable to come up with a reason.
>>24059426Why does that matter when you don’t exist?
>>24059427Death is part of life. How can you consider death to be good when life is bad. >>24059429Potential to exist
>>24059436Death is not part of life, death is the end of life. Isn’t the end of a bad thing a good thing? Your second point also doesn’t make sense, do you think the dead come back to life?
>>24059441How does the end of something make it not part of that something? There is no death without life.Well I thought you were referring to non-existence. Things that do not exist cannot die
>>24059464Dying is the end of life, death is the opposite of life. A universe that never had life would be a dead universe. You’ve failed to articulate how being dead is different then non existence, or why dying would be bad if existence is inherently negative.
>>24059477>The end of something is not part of something. >Never existing is the same as existing and then dying. >A place where life did not exist, death existedNah
>>24059490I fail to see how the dying part of existing is bad of existence is bad. I think dying is bad is because existence is good. Explain why it’s bad and please don’t deflect this time.
>>24059493Dying is bad is because existence is bad. There is no death without life
>>24059507Not an explanation. Nice sunsets are also part of existence, are they also bad? Give a specific reason why being dead is bad if existence is bad?
>>24059513>NOOOO YOU CAN'T SAY THAT TWO THINGS THAT ARE ONE SAME BY NOT ABLE TO EXIST WITHOUT EXISTING MUTUALLY ARE BAD!
>>24059527Another deflection. Fairly ironic given you accusing others of doing the same thing.
stop it, he's already dead. though thread itself dying will soon put an end to this anyhow. I hope you learned something about rhetoric, if not philosophy, pessimist-kun
>>24059555Trips of truth
>>24059531You believe that death is bad because existence is good. I believe that death is bad because existence is bad. What is the problem? Oh right, you can't differentiate between never existing and existing and then dying...
>>24059567Because you haven’t given a good explanation for why it’s bad based on your belief system. A nice sunset is part of existence, does that also make it bad? It really puzzles more about how many leaps of logic you need to constantly take. Why do you need pessimism to be true?
>>24059587>Because you haven’t given a good explanation for why it’s bad based on your belief system.>Nonexistence is good>Existence is bad>Life and death are parts of existence therefore they are bad.Where is the problem? >A nice sunset is part of existence, does that also make it bad?Clearly we are talking about living beings
>>24059627You can’t just say that something is part of existence and that makes it bad. Why specifically, based on your beliefs, is death bad. Are you arguing that there are literally no positive aspects of existence?
>>24059633>You can’t just say that something is part of existence and that makes it bad. Weird, you literally did the same thing but in reverse.>Why specifically, according to your beliefs, is death bad?Because I believe that existence/life is bad and death is part of it. In addition, many of the deaths are painful>Are you arguing that there are literally no positive aspects of existence?Yes
>>24059651>Weird, you literally did the same thing but in reverse.No? The opposite would be saying that both death and life were good, I’m saying death is bad because life is good. >YesThen why not kill yourself?
>>24059657>Then why not kill yourself?Death and suicide are bad for me
>life bad>suicide also badPick up your mind, damn it.
>>24059678But you just said there’s nothing good in life? Why would more life be good if there’s nothing good in life? Why not end life quicker?
>>24059679Anon, Benatar's biggest argument is that life is bad because death is bad.Your problem is that you project your beliefs onto those of the pessimists.
>>24059686No? Benatars argument is that life is had because life is bad. Are you saying you would want to be immortal.
>>24059692>No? Benatars argument is that life is had because life is badClearly you didn't read Benatar
>>24059697I’ve read every one of his books.
>>24059685If there is nothing good, why would committing suicide be a good thing?
>>24059701You skipped the death part then
>>24059703Because then you can’t have more bad stuff happen to you?
>>24059710Maybe it's just the optimistic bias, but I personally think that killing myself would be a much bad thing for me to do than not doing it
>>24059740Why?
>>24059749The truth is I don't want to commit suicide but I have responsibilities and I prefer to take risks, even if worse things than suicide happen to me. Which brings me into one of the cases of the optimistic bias that Benatar talks about. In which people have an interest in staying alive even if their lives are complete shit.
>>24059807Why would suicide be worse than death of old age? If you commit suicide now you have no more pain ever, excluding the possibility of something worse after
>>24059856All people know it. But we are all interested in living, that is why we prefer to suffer rather than commit suicide, even if our life sucks. The interest in living only disappears when they have cancer or want to commit suicide? I don't remember it anymore. I think the optimism bias is true
>>24059876Lots of people commit suicide. Can you at least admit you logically should given what you believe?
>>24059876Most people believe they will go to magic lava hell if they commit suicide.
>>24059890>Lots of people commit suicideNot my problem, most people don't. And well, if life is so good? Why do so many people commit suicide?
>>24059895Most people think that life has positive value, you do not.
>>24059895I don’t think life is good for everyone, you’re the one stating it’s always a negative.
>>24059899Yes, and among many of the people who commit suicide are people who give a positive value to life. I would dare to say that the majority
>>24059922If suicide did not exist, life would be less bad
>>24059930Most people who commit suicide think life has negative value which is why they end it. It feels like you really want this all to be true even through you’re employing mental gymnastics. Why do you need this to be true?
>>24059939I really don’t get why you think that. You’ve been constantly stating that existence is a net negative, why is continued existence a good thing?
>>24059944>Most people who commit suicide think life has negative value which is why they end it.I wouldn't be so sure. I think that most people who commit suicide could definitely give a negative value to their own life but a negative value to life in general? I highly doubt it. Idk, I get the impression that most people commit suicide for personal reasons or for stupid things like your girlfriend leaving you. A philosophical-schizo-pessimistic suicide must be rare
