Same shit, different planet!
Excellent post, and painlessly succinct
Thanks for the link to the article, Karl.All I can say is that I will never ceased to be amazed by the optimism of some people. It just shows that people can be really different at a fundamental level. None of what they mentioned appeals to me in the least. It just sounds like an unimaginable amount of risk for a small chance of glory.I've really missed the pessimist blogosphere. No one seems to be updating regularly anymore. Not that I am innocent.
Most seem to have decamped to FB, which has left the blogosphere pretty quiet. And good ol' Jim Crawford has shut up shop, which is sad, but understandable. He was the godfather of us all. But hey, once you get the basic message, there isn't much more to say, is there?
There is not,you are right Karl.But all of you have made a big difference to me,just so you know.Thanks for everything.There is once anti-natalist message board which is updated almost daily,you may like to check it out :http://whybother.freeboards.org/ Keep well mate.
You could please tell me how to find the anti-natalists on fb.Thanks.
Thanks, Second Anonymous. I appreciate that, and yeah, I keep an eye on that board.Third Anon, just go to FB and search for 'Antinatalism' and 'Antinatalism Philosophy Discussion Group'.
You're right about the level of risk, and even if they did survive, the 'glory' isn't real anyway - it's just ego-chasing and projected value where there is none. Mars doesn't need any pointless life forms on its hostile surface. Also that potential mother who is supposedly bright enough to study for a PhD has ignored the basic science that even this article has quoted, namely "high levels of radiation in space damage the ovaries and testicles, which could hamper people's efforts to reproduce"!
So these people are willing to suffocate to death in their (entirely unnecessary) attempts to bring the human race to Mars so we can destroy a whole new planet. So much wrong with that! Reading through some of their interviews it is clear how naïve these people are. Book smart, but naïve as hell. They act so nonchalant about the likelihood of suffocating, burning to death, and having absolutely no medical care, not to mention the psychological effects of a small group being abandoned on a foreign planet (Lord of the Flies, anyone?). Hell what are you going to do if you get a toothache up there? Go mad from pain, have to rip the thing out yourself. All in your egotistical attempt to bring more people into existence so that they too can suffocate to death. When these people are actually up there, dying of loneliness and gasping for air that isn't there, perhaps they will see life for what it is and has always been, and understand why we Antinatalists are the way we are. Just imagine one of these "Martians" up there dying in agony and horror, cradling a baby they've created and are about to abandon, a new life born to be doomed to all of this. "I'm sorry, god, I'm sorry". And the infant thinks- "Too late to be sorry mum, too late"
“[…] perhaps they will see life for what it is and has always been, and understand why we Antinatalists are the way we are.”Nope. I doubt that most people will ever stop thinking of life as anything but desirable, no matter how horrible it gets. Hey, one can always throw new people at problems in the deluded hope that they will solve them.
That sounds like an accurate prediction to me. You don't need to use fiction as an example, I can imagine something like the Darien colony scheme of the 17th century up there instead, with the same results.
I stumbled upon this blog by accident having just read David Benatar's Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence (a rather dry, dispassionate work to be sure). Still, there is stuff here, as well as in the aforementioned book, that intrigues me. Not the least the candour of the posts. Excruciatingly honest. I'm not sure what I have to contribute, doubting if I should sail my rickety boat into these mysterious seas where seemingly quite a few vessels have disappeared. But here I am, for the moment. I have a question, rhetorical really but why not put it out there: given the well articulated arguments for non-existence, is there not some bizarre paradox in this? Let me explain: Cioran, for all his convoluted pessimism, continued to write and publish, eat potatoes and drink poor quality Balkan wine, shit and quite possibly visit local whores. Why? Why continue to live when there is no reason to live? Did he lack the courage if his convictions? Yet all the posts here suggest a similar contradiction: life shouldn't BE and yet we ARE. The evangelical Christian writer Francis Schaeffer felt this was a fatal error in the logic of modern man. I don't hold to Sharffer's views of the world but he seems to have a point. Why do we live, if life is a bizarre and deadly joke, a phantasmagorical nightmare of meaninglessness and unwarranted pain?
I guess one could reply with the Cioran line: 'There's no point in suicide, because one always kills oneself too late'. You're here, you make the best of it regardless, you're addicted to life before you become self-conscious, and ultimately anyone, pessimist or not, may commit suicide at some point.
Thanks Karl for your response. I do identify with this; in fact it lies at the crux of things for me. I made various decisions as a younger man (marriage, a child) while deeply enmeshed in a pre-self conscious state largely informed by a somewhat optimistic evangelisl Christian world view. Having spent literally decades stripping away all the bullshit, falsehoods, pollyannaish fantasies and debilitating accretions I find "'There's no point in suicide, because one always kills oneself too late'. You're here, you make the best of it regardless" the best possible answer. Because I do not presently see suicide as a viable option, largely because it would impose suffering on wife, daughter, my dog.. Thus... "too late". So your comment does address the paradox!
Thimblerig....to personally answer your question as to why I am still alive although I consider life in this world to be an absolute horror and an abomination. Each antinatalist will have his or her own reasons for their continued existence. For me it is that my attempts at suicide have all been failures. The reality is that suicide is much harder to achieve than we are led to believe. I've never had any access to a gun, and the only methods available to me have been too horrendous to contemplate (ie: burn to death). Another obstacle in the way to a much-wished-for demise is the scary fact that many suicide attempts end in grisly failure. Even shooting yourself in the head is not a guaranteed death and may result in profound disfigurement. So there's the first point...why am I here?...because I have no means to leave. The other reason are my pets who depend upon me, and who I could not forsake. I promise you I have known in a primitive way since the day that I was born that I did not want to be born, that it has been disastrous for me, and that I would have been better off never living at all. Hell, all of us would have been better off. Every day of my life I have wished I was not imprisoned by my selfish and unthinking parents in this straight-jacket skin-suit of flesh and nerve endings which confine me and at any moment can subject me to unbearable pain, as it has all too many times before. So I continue my journey through the minefield of life, from unexpected pain to unexpected pain, until gratefully my journey is over. At least I have educated others during my unwanted stay on this planet and hopefully prevented many births by doing so.
Hmmm... to leave is to shed ones own suffering but quite possibly to compound the suffering of others. To not be around to rescue a bird caught in discarded plastic packaging or like some comic book hero to save a woman from a masked attacker. To stay is to continue in the suffering, the Maya, the illusion. Catch 22...
Have you read the complete nonsense verse of Edward Lear? Humor to sublimate the pain of meaninglessness!
A new book co-authored by David Benatar is coming in the next few months months. In this book Wasserman takes a pronatalist view and Benatar takes a defense of antinatalism. It's an intriguing debate on procreative ethics.I can't wait for this book!http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199333547.do
Wow! Exciting news, thanks a lot for the heads-up!
Why would any antinatalist look forward to this book? Is there anything that could possibly convince us that our views are inherently wrong, and that we should then all join Quiverfull?Good way for Benatar to make more money, though....