You are viewing the historical archive of The Philosophy Forum.
For current discussions, visit the live forum.
Go to live forum

Sumyung Gui

['Member']Joined: November 20, 2020 at 09:45Last active: July 12, 2023 at 12:28None discussions49 comments

Comments

It doesn't have to be human.
July 06, 2023 at 12:38
Suffering I think.
March 13, 2023 at 14:50
Okay. I mean you posted on a forum, you should expect people to respond. Daft stuff altogether.
March 13, 2023 at 14:50
My point is that there is a good reason the religions exist right? Just another version of "why don't you commit suicide?"
March 13, 2023 at 14:22
You're speaking for those billions of people who are religious too? For those it doesn't seem life in and of itself is good.
March 13, 2023 at 12:28
Including me. For existing people!
March 13, 2023 at 11:05
They don't exist nothing can be good or bad for them. Only existing people can suffer or enjoy harms and benefits.
March 13, 2023 at 11:04
I'll just keep asking; for whom is it bad?
March 13, 2023 at 11:02
You said celebrating harms. Did you not? No one is doing that.
March 13, 2023 at 11:02
So why is it okay give people age related disease and loss of ability?
March 13, 2023 at 10:58
Correct! Which is neutral! Nothing immoral has happened.
March 13, 2023 at 10:56
Procreation is intrinsically NOT a personal matter. Firstly you need two people to do it and a third or even more persons are created who have no say ...
March 13, 2023 at 10:55
My leg not yours! You will give your kids the gift of disease and decay for your needs without the possibility of consent. That's what my thought expe...
March 13, 2023 at 10:51
There is nobody to be miss those goods. How come you can't see that?
March 13, 2023 at 10:49
Absolutely you're kind of getting it. I don't think we need to worry then about creating people no one gets hurt because of our needs if we choose not...
March 13, 2023 at 10:49
If this is true no one would procreate.
March 13, 2023 at 10:47
Bad for whom?
March 13, 2023 at 10:47
The answer is no one will be harmed by this. The non existent don't suffer.
March 13, 2023 at 10:46
It's complete unacceptable to me, has been the root cause of so much ugliness.
March 13, 2023 at 10:46
Only for people who exist to be deprived of goods. No it wouldn't lol. There'd be no one there to be haunted! Please tell me you can recognise that? I...
March 13, 2023 at 10:38
They're not tho. We've no duty to create them. If the universe went silent there'd be no issue. Only to existing people. Only for those who exist in s...
March 13, 2023 at 10:26
Camus was wrong <shrugs> Religious Buddhists believe something as unverifiable and irrationally optimistic as Christians. But they're not necessary. A...
March 13, 2023 at 10:14
She was an ardent Christian. Died at 47. Hard to know how authentic he was. No because no one is deprived of the happiness. No one suffers. No one los...
March 13, 2023 at 10:06
Ah religion. Can't really go much further with that. Only to those who exist. Not to prospective beings.
March 13, 2023 at 09:58
But you're surely not suggesting creating blind people so that they can learn to be resilient? That's perverse. Or I'm insane.
March 13, 2023 at 09:52
Resilience? Wait why is that in the list?
March 13, 2023 at 09:48
Does this justify procreation tho?
March 13, 2023 at 09:44
XD
March 13, 2023 at 09:44
Okay so we're talking about the asymmetry now? Or my week?
March 13, 2023 at 09:32
We're trying to walk two paths here. 1) the asymmetry we could talk about that. 2) you talking about my perceptions of my life. 1) is fine to talk abo...
March 13, 2023 at 09:05
I agree with the asymmetry don't get me wrong. I think it's correct. Benatar just formalized something I already thought. If you could be terribly wro...
March 13, 2023 at 08:57
Well I don't judge my experiences of the world by what Benatar tells me. I suppose you have the correct perspective then?
March 13, 2023 at 08:49
Okay I guess that's the impasse then. Telling people they're not perceiving things right and that their feelings are invalid is patronizing.
March 13, 2023 at 08:41
I'm curious, are you aware of the axiological asymmetry? "There are also moments of fulfilment even when we don't care." How patronizing.
March 13, 2023 at 08:31
"There is no empirical evidence that most people don't value their lives or that there aren't good moments that we did not expect." Well cool, because...
March 12, 2023 at 19:12
Omg. I don't know why it would seem attractive from the outside.
March 12, 2023 at 18:42
I'm none the wiser.
March 12, 2023 at 18:31
Ah. No I mean now.
March 12, 2023 at 18:26
Yes. Still curious why people find it attractive.
March 12, 2023 at 18:24
I have no idea. Christianity as I understand it is false. But there you are promised salvation whatever it means. Stoicism is far less anchored.
March 12, 2023 at 18:21
"with a touch of Optimism" How much and of what?
March 12, 2023 at 18:19
Oh I know what it is. I'm just not sure why it's attractive. I was raised Christian unfortunately.
March 12, 2023 at 18:18
What is attractive about Stoicism tho? This is the part that baffles me.
March 12, 2023 at 17:42
Empirically this is just not true.
March 12, 2023 at 16:58
Thanks, I guess there is some value in asking the question at the same time.
March 12, 2023 at 15:46
What progress do you speak of? A lot of the progress I see is in the ability to support more and more sentient beings. But I'm not sure if that's just...
March 12, 2023 at 15:17
Yes this is pretty strange.
March 12, 2023 at 15:07
This argument strikes me as at best indentured servitude to a hypothetical or slavery to a hypothetical at worst. Am I off the mark? "You must exist a...
March 12, 2023 at 15:03
"Firstly, most people do seem to value their lives" One can value one's life and because of that come to the conclusion of antinatalism. "I value my l...
March 12, 2023 at 14:44