No it can certainly be used by a consequentialist. The least amount of suffering is preventing birth, and there's no downside to the absence of good i...
Based on all this, your position seems to be deontological of the negative ethics variety, which is about where mine is too :up: . That is to say, the...
This is an interesting post that a lot of aggressive posters on here might want to look at to self-examine their posting etiquette. They will defend t...
Cool insights. One can have two ideas in one's head at the same time. I bet you you can find some happy-go-lucky philosophical pessimists. Not all PPs...
As you know, I am not advocating for wholesale human extinction other than people choosing not to procreate. We may be closer then.. I would say it's ...
Honestly, this is the fuckn shit that makes me not want to answer you. Do not "throw sand in my face" before you make your argument. Just make your ar...
So after our conversations, I am of the idea that really unnecessary suffering and dignity are inextricably intertwined as some sort of "limits" of mo...
This is in respect to non-existence and its absence. The absence of pain that could have occurred, is always good. The absence of pleasure for someone...
Yes it is different.. If someone is not born, there is no "deprivation" of pleasure. If someone is born, they are deprived when it is taken away. This...
@"Antinatalist" too It's not about act, it's simply the state of affairs of not being harmed/in pain/suffering/negative, etc. is in some way "good". B...
It doesn't matter. This is unacceptable to do for someone else, as what you are doing to them is like the lifeguard situation, unless you agree, the l...
Being that all conditions of suffering are created from the conditions of birth itself, I would say it's pretty substantial. It literally foists the g...
So any premise can't be substantiated then because at the end of the day, it is up to the person who follows the ethical framework. However, if the pr...
Must it? Again, if you kidnapped the lifeguard because you feel it brings about a greater good, or even worse, because it makes you feel good, is that...
But as you point out, much of antinatalism is a sub-section of overall philosophical pessimism. Fundamentally, the problems are incorrigible. If you d...
But is that true? There is unnecessary suffering caused to another. Why do benefits even play a factor in this? That is all you need to know. If I kid...
Yes I know this is your beef. But as I said: And again, Does it matter if the counterfactual person is "prevented good"? No. Now do the same with suff...
No, because in the counterfactual case of "not having the goods of life", preventing this (or rather not starting this on behalf of someone else) is n...
Not sure the objection. I guess I do mean "a particular person", but how does that change the conclusion. That person that might be born is not "depri...
Again, you are misunderstanding me. If a potential parent exists, whereby the consequent is a new person who suffers, the rule is in play- prevent sai...
No that wasn't the conclusion I was going with. Rather, no one exists prior to birth to even balance a lesser harm with a greater harm. Thus it is pur...
Again, if you kidnapped an adult to go to the school of MU, because you thought that was the best course for that person, is that wrong? I would say y...
Ok, so this then would be degrees and threshold.. see analogy I used with preventing suffering. Persuading someone with words vs. physically forcing a...
Right, so instead of God thinks you're a sack of shit, it's just people that think you are a sack of shit. Not sure what was hard to get. However, if ...
But there was a part of being a part of God's favor and grace attached to it. Other than "You're a sack of shit if you don't do X, Y, Z, and X, Y, Z i...
We can play this game all day :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :...
No. Are humans alive to know the rule? Yes. Then the rule applies to those humans. Cool. Are there no humans around to know the rule? Yes Then there i...
No dude.. I know what it is. You haven't proven that's what I am doing. You are asserting. You: claim reductio... I said where? If you are alive and y...
Oh please. "Idiocy" blah blah. Your arguments are all insult with a smidgen of not-thought-out objections. It's a tired approach and one used too much...
Yet as long as there are people around who know the consequence of the harm, this objection doesn't matter. Is it a situation that we know exists and ...
If you can reference the article, that might help. But I think there was some relation in terms of sets of relations. I would imagine an ideal for Bud...
I think we get a slippery slope here anytime forcing a situation is used, even for the good. If I was to kidnap someone to go to the awesome school of...
Yes this seems to make sense to me for reasons why people do it. People's personalities, rhetorical tactic for an audience, throw someone off their ga...
I think in a regular conversation this make sense, but if we are all trying to be "philosophical" to some extent, then it is rhetorical flourish to si...
Yeah correct. I just think intuition as it relates to negative ethics are obligatory than ones related to positive ethics because without the negative...
Why so much of that one though? Is that a philosophy thing, an internet thing, a forum thing, a cultural thing, an individual thing? I'm not sure why ...
Agreed, but there is a sort smamriness that pervades legitimate remarks. It's not just "outright" insult. That would be too obvious.. It is the subtly...
So my taste is to poison the well, therefore poisoning the well is legitimate. My taste is to X therefore Xing is legitimate. Is this a case for no ru...
Schopenhauer believed that every character had its own nature outside of the PSR. Thus although it seems we have a sort of spontaneity, it comes from ...
Yep, good distinction an one that seems to be blurred here a lot. Once someone continually shows the rhetoric card, then I am forced to get in the mud...
Comments