Viewing last 25 versions of comment by Cirrus Light on image #1662508

"[@Background Pony #92E7":](/1662508#comment_6933527
")  
[@PonyPonyPonyP0ny":](/1662508#comment_6932386
)  
It's a fundamental clash of underlying ideology.


 
The fundamental argument underpinning antinatalism is that life is a net negative. That you weigh the good times vs. the bad and measure life in that way.


 
But that's not how people measure life.


 
Firstly, life has intrinsic value. We believe this because killing is bad, so it must be that life has some wonderful value to it.


 
Secondly, at some level we understand that existence itself is the highest good. Antinatalism completely fails to recognize this. We'll go see a sad play or a scary movie or even fight in simulated wars in videogames because it doesn't matter if the games make us rage, the plays make us sad, or the movie makes us scared. Those are all "bad" emotions, but we'd rather feel _*something_* than nothing. That's because we understand that existence itself, not pleasure, is the highest good. And the more we feel, the more we exist in some way.


 
Thirdly, antinatalism is saying life has no meaning that makes it worthwhile. It's just pain and pleasure, that's all. No greater meaning to make all the pain "worth it", ie _*worthwhile_*. If you waited in line for 3 hours for a 5-minute ride at _*Six Flags_*, then you decided before you entered that line, that those 5 minutes were worth those 3 hours of waiting in line.


 
Similarly, life is mostly waiting in line. It's mostly working. Yes, there's a lot of pain and misery. But the bits of joy we get to experience from it make it worthwhile. For me, that's those moments of reflection, and I'm currently deciding what else to invest my life in - there are other things that will make it worthwhile, too. Certainly I hope to have a mate one day, and good moments together will make life worthwhile. I'll also maybe write and weave wondrous worlds, learn a **lot** more physics, maybe design space launch vehicles - and those will also make life a bit more worthwhile.




 

 
This picture depicts one of the most wonderful, worthwhile things of life. The sheer unimaginable joy of feeling such love and care for an infant, and the wonder of introducing them to existence, and loving them so much you didn't know it was possible to love that much. That is a sheer waterfall of meaning and joy that makes all of life worthwhile.


 
Then we get people in the comments saying, "life isn't worthwhile! She shouldn't have had that child that makes her so happy and makes her life so meaningful and wonderful because life is miserable and has no meaning or wonder."


 
Your actual words are "life is net suffering so I don't think I should have children", but you always think you _*should_* do what you believe is right, so you're asserting indirectly that not having children is the right thing to do, ie, Rarity shouldn't have. And the reason you assert that, is "life is net suffering", which means you believe life isn't meaningful and wonderful.




 

 
In other words, you're indirectly, yet very strongly attacking all the sweet love and tender joy the image invokes, even if a little. You're literally ideologically combating the meaning and purpose in life.


 
Naturally, people's response is to be hostile and defensive seinsce you're actively posing a threat to everything they value by attacking the idea of value itself.
 
While I halfway agree with nihilism's assertion that there's no *fundamental* value - there is most certainly value. Each person chooses what they value, and lives according to that. But those values are *very* real. But if you're arguing life isn't worthwhile, you're arguing there are no values, since values are what make life worthwhile.

"@Background Pony #92E7":/1662508#comment_6933527
"@PonyPonyPonyP0ny":/1662508#comment_6932386
It's a fundamental clash of underlying ideology.

The fundamental argument underpinning antinatalism is that life is a net negative. That you weigh the good times vs. the bad and measure life in that way.

But that's not how people measure life.

Firstly, life has intrinsic value. We believe this because killing is bad, so it must be that life has some wonderful value to it.

Secondly, at some level we understand that existence itself is the highest good. Antinatalism completely fails to recognize this. We'll go see a sad play or a scary movie or even fight in simulated wars in videogames because it doesn't matter if the games make us rage, the plays make us sad, or the movie makes us scared. Those are all "bad" emotions, but we'd rather feel _something_ than nothing. That's because we understand that existence itself, not pleasure, is the highest good. And the more we feel, the more we exist in some way.

Thirdly, antinatalism is saying life has no meaning that makes it worthwhile. It's just pain and pleasure, that's all. No greater meaning to make all the pain "worth it", ie _worthwhile_. If you waited in line for 3 hours for a 5-minute ride at _Six Flags_, then you decided before you entered that line, that those 5 minutes were worth those 3 hours of waiting in line.

Similarly, life is mostly waiting in line. It's mostly working. Yes, there's a lot of pain and misery. But the bits of joy we get to experience from it make it worthwhile. For me, that's those moments of reflection, and I'm currently deciding what else to invest my life in - there are other things that will make it worthwhile, too. Certainly I hope to have a mate one day, and good moments together will make life worthwhile. I'll also maybe write and weave wondrous worlds, learn a *lot* more physics, maybe design space launch vehicles - and those will also make life a bit more worthwhile.



This picture depicts one of the most wonderful, worthwhile things of life. The sheer unimaginable joy of feeling such love and care for an infant, and the wonder of introducing them to existence, and loving them so much you didn't know it was possible to love that much. That is a sheer waterfall of meaning and joy that makes all of life worthwhile.

Then we get people in the comments saying, "life isn't worthwhile! She shouldn't have had that child that makes her so happy and makes her life so meaningful and wonderful because life is miserable and has no meaning or wonder."

Your actual words are "life is net suffering so I don't think I should have children", but you always think you _should_ do what you believe is right, so you're asserting indirectly that not having children is the right thing to do, ie, Rarity shouldn't have. And the reason you assert that, is "life is net suffering", which means you believe life isn't meaningful and wonderful.



In other words, you're indirectly, yet very strongly attacking all the sweet love and tender joy the image invokes, even if a little. You're literally ideologically combating the meaning and purpose in life.

Naturally, people's response is to be hostile and defensive sense you're actively posing a threat to everything they value.