The Optimism Delusion - David Benatar responds to Richard Dawkins.

[Viva June]

Quote Originally Posted by Kramdar

I guess what I'm trying to say, Viva June, is that proving that antinatalism is objectively Moral is going to take much more than a syllogism.

Yes, it will probably require three or four.

To counter your proof by counterexample, I would split the hair further and point out that masochists in fact experience pain as pleasure (a phaenomenon explained more fully by Rob Halford in 1982).

The lack of objective moral standards is a problem for antinatalism inasmuch as it's a problem for any kind of ethics. I can't lie and say I have a way around it, but then again the problem doesn't bother me much. Also, note that to me and many others the absence of objectivity provides support for the antinatalist conclusion, along the lines of Zapffe's tragic pessimism (which is orthogonal to Benatar's): in a universe with no metaphysical guarantees for things like morality, conscious life is bound to result in existential despair sooner or later, hence conscious life is best avoided.

[Kramdar]

Quote Originally Posted by Viva June

Quote Originally Posted by Kramdar I guess what I'm trying to say, Viva June, is that proving that antinatalism is objectively Moral is going to take much more than a syllogism. Yes, it will probably require three or four. To counter your proof by counterexample, I would split the hair further and point out that masochists in fact experience pain as pleasure (a phaenomenon explained more fully by Rob Halford in 1982). The lack of objective moral standards is a problem for antinatalism inasmuch as it's a problem for any kind of ethics. I can't lie and say I have a way around it, but then again the problem doesn't bother me much. Also, note that to me and many others the absence of objectivity provides support for the antinatalist conclusion, along the lines of Zapffe's tragic pessimism (which is orthogonal to Benatar's): in a universe with no metaphysical guarantees for things like morality, conscious life is bound to result in existential despair sooner or later, hence conscious life is best avoided.

Unspoken premise: Non-existence is necessary (self evident).

Existence is an adjunct to nonexistence.
Adjuncts are unnecessary.
Therefore, existence is unnecessary. (1)

And then:

Existence is unpredictable.
Unpredictability carries risk.
Therefore, existence is a risk. (2)

And then, combining (1) and (2):

Existence is an unnecessary risk.

This, I believe, is the best an antinatalist can do logically. I can see how it would convince antinatalists of their position, but it doesn't convince me. The risk of existence is small, in my eyes.

Here's why:

See, the majority of one's life is not spent suffering, because if any kind of suffering goes on for long its bearer grows accustomed to it till they are completely numb to it.

And most of life is just that -- being numb to suffering and happiness -- just experiencing life neutrally -- soaking in the present experiences, reflecting over the past experiences, anticipating the future experiences.
Through most of life, one isn’t even aware one exists -- cleaning the car, watching TV, scratching an itch, eating, sleeping, visiting online forums, deciding on what color cushions for the sofa.

Yes, there are moments of extreme suffering -- migraine, public humiliation, the loss of loved ones. But much of life's suffering is spent reflecting on such horrors rather than experiencing them first hand. Thus, much of one's suffering is deliberately brought about by oneself. For instance, I found that the very act of calling myself an antinatalist made me miserable.

I eventually decided to turn life into an enemy to overcome rather than escape from. I tried to live like a movie protagonist, assigning myself to outrageous experiences like running naked through the woods, making someone different smile every day, having crazy drunken sex on a skyscraper roof, holidaying to forgotten places, tasting the myriad dishes of the world, writing a novel, laughing constantly for a whole night while tripping on acid, and on, and on.

I've done almost all of those things now (still writing the novel), and there's still an infinite amount of things to do out there.
And now all the things I most love about life I tend to dwell on, and all the things I like least about life I tend to ignore.

In the end, I can't stop myself developing a migraine every now and then, but instead of mulling over how unfortunate I am to feel this way, I can study the pain and turn it into an accurate description for my novel, or I can think about something completely different -- something that makes me laugh, for instance -- which makes me temporarily forget myself and my pain till that pain's gone for good (and replaced with a rush of relief).

And if I feel the onset of that killing sadness, that objectless melancholy, I'll get on my bike, plug in my earphones, and speed through the landscape -- renewed since my last visit -- while my favorite songs send shivers through my spine. Or if I'm feeling lazy, I'll just watch a silly comedy movie from one of the hundreds of thousands that exist in the world.

Despite what people say, this is a BIG world, and there's always something to do. Think about all the different things that must be happening in all the cities and wildernesses of the world as you sit reading this.

In the end, the reason most people aren't as miserable as antinatalists is because optimism goes a long long way, and focusing on life's miseries is guaranteed to make life miserable. Even if one can't help but believe that life is miserable, or pointless, one doesn't have to dwell on such facts. There's enough in this world to keep anyone distracted from the "truth" for a thousand lifetimes.

There really is no lasting harm in experiencing the world. It may often seem like a rotten place, but this is just another illusion, and we are ultimately the orchestrators of our own illusions, or at least of our focus on them.

This is the real reason why I'm not an antinatalist any more.

[Nemonymous]

...which brings us back to the optimum delusion!

[Nemonymous]

Quote Originally Posted by Nemonymous

...which brings us back to the optimum delusion!

....which doesn't prevent me from being a natural pessimist, but prevents me from being as deeply pessimistic as I might otherwise have been.