Venting you can't deprive a non existent entity of anything

[Darkover]

you can't deprive a non existent entity of anything it baffles me that most people don't get that
how much better off i would of been to have never been born

the idea that non-existent beings cannot experience deprivation because they lack the capacity for experience altogether. This is often summarized in the argument that bringing someone into existence exposes them to potential harm, while not bringing them into existence spares them from both harm and the absence of pleasure, which they wouldn't miss because they never existed to desire it.

It seems straightforward, but many people struggle with this perspective because they view life as inherently valuable or see potential future happiness as justifying existence. The notion that "nothingness" is preferable to any amount of suffering is difficult for those who value the experiences of life, even with its struggles.

Suffering is inevitable—everyone will experience pain, loss, and struggle simply by existing. Even if some people find pleasure or happiness, these experiences are uncertain, fleeting, and often come at a significant cost.

In contrast, non-existence ensures freedom from suffering without any loss of pleasure, since a non-existent being has no needs or desires. It's a simple yet powerful reasoning that many overlook because they're deeply attached to the idea of life as inherently worthwhile.

 

[Pluto]

 

[Forever Sleep]

Not that I am a believer in a spiritual realm but this does absolutely hinge on there being no reason whatsoever for life. (Which I mostly agree- there probably isn't!)

There are some people though, eg. those who believe in reincarnation or, that we're here for some reason- to learn and grow or whatever, who presumably believe that life needs to exist for that to happen. That it's some journey a spirit needs to make through mortal bodies. That's not my belief but, it would account for some people feeling that life is necessary. I'd likely side with you- that there isn't proper proof for this. That it's largely down to faith and belief.

For me, the larger issue is choice though. I'd have slightly less of a problem with the idea of people reproducing all over the place if it were easier to leave this place. If- after accepting that it wasn't our choice to come here, we could leave it peacefully, I'd be more ok-ish with that. The issue would still be the person would likely have to wait till age 18 for that though. If those years were awful then, that's pretty bad. But, that at least would be better.

I think you do have to accept that, the majority of people don't want to kill themselves. Maybe the majority aren't even that unhappy with life. If they were- surely, there'd be no opposition to assisted suicide and, more would be antinatilist. So- probability speaking- what do you suppose the chances are of having a child that will be ok with life? Probably pretty high. I imagine it only is the minority who end up like us. So- that's their argument really I suppose. Their argument would be stronger though (in my view) if those struggling that much were able to leave peacefully.

Also- they simply don't think like you or me. They maybe can't even envisage it as a possibility that someone could end up like this. I'm not sure many people knowingly think they're bring their child into a life of suffering. Sonetimes, I would have thought ot would be obvious but, apparently not. Sometimes I wonder if something goes haywire in our brains when we're in love or whatever. It's got to be a very strong biological drive for some people. I wonder why it isn't for all of us.

 

[Darkover]

Not that I am a believer in a spiritual realm but this does absolutely hinge on there being no reason whatsoever for life. (Which I mostly agree- there probably isn't!)

a reason for the universe leads to the conclusion that there is a higher being, first cause, or intelligent designer that is the reason for the universe's existence. how can something that came into existence from nothing have any reason

There are some people though, eg. those who believe in reincarnation or, that we're here for some reason- to learn and grow or whatever, who presumably believe that life needs to exist for that to happen. That it's some journey a spirit needs to make through mortal bodies.

There is no empirical evidence to support the existence of a soul, reincarnation, or karma. These ideas are rooted in belief systems and cannot be verified or falsified through scientific methods.

If life exists for growth, why does suffering often destroy rather than build individuals? Extreme suffering—war, abuse, illness—frequently breaks people, leading to despair, trauma, or even suicide. This contradicts the notion that all experiences are meaningful or beneficial.

For me, the larger issue is choice though. I'd have slightly less of a problem with the idea of people reproducing all over the place if it were easier to leave this place. If- after accepting that it wasn't our choice to come here, we could leave it peacefully, I'd be more ok-ish with that. The issue would still be the person would likely have to wait till age 18 for that though. If those years were awful then, that's pretty bad. But, that at least would be better.

governments won't allow us to leave this life behind in peace, because the prohibition of assisted suicide as a way to sustain the workforce and economic systems. A society where opting out of life is easy could disrupt economies reliant on labor and consumption.

So- probability speaking- what do you suppose the chances are of having a child that will be ok with life?

it's probably 90 percent happy with their life 10 percent not happy with their life that would mean there are over 1 billion people wanting to leave

 

[Forever Sleep]

a reason for the universe leads to the conclusion that there is a higher being, first cause, or intelligent designer that is the reason for the universe's existence. how can something that came into existence from nothing have any reason

There is no empirical evidence to support the existence of a soul, reincarnation, or karma. These ideas are rooted in belief systems and cannot be verified or falsified through scientific methods.

If life exists for growth, why does suffering often destroy rather than build individuals? Extreme suffering—war, abuse, illness—frequently breaks people, leading to despair, trauma, or even suicide. This contradicts the notion that all experiences are meaningful or beneficial.

governments won't allow us to leave this life behind in peace, because the prohibition of assisted suicide as a way to sustain the workforce and economic systems. A society where opting out of life is easy could disrupt economies reliant on labor and consumption.

it's probably 90 percent happy with their life 10 percent not happy with their life that would mean there are over 1 billion people wanting to leave

Oh, definitely. I'm more atheist leaning, so I'm doubtful a God exists. However, not being able to find something isn't proof it doesn't exist. There will doubtless still be species of animal- eg. in the deepest part of the ocean that we haven't discovered. They exist- most likely. It's just, we haven't found them or given them some fancy Latin name. Maybe there's more proability for us that they are there because we understand that ecosystem more and what types of animals are able to live there. Celestial beings (if there are any,) we have no clue about.

Also, because something doesn't seem to make sense to our morality. Or, it seems incredibly cruel, that also doesn't prove that there isn't a God. They may just be a very cruel God or, one who has knowledge of a far greater plan which (for some unfathomable reason) requires beings to live (and suffer.)

I agree that our societies/ governments likely won't help (relatively) healthy people kill themselves. My argument more is that, unless someone has suffered deeply themselves, will they truly understand the risk they are exposing their children to? In some sense, surely it's easier for us to be antinatilist because we've witnessed ourselves how badly life can end up.

Or, put another way- were you so vehemently against life and procreation when your own life was better than it is now? Have you at any point thought having children was an ok thing to do?

 

[Darkover]

Oh, definitely. I'm more atheist leaning, so I'm doubtful a God exists. However, not being able to find something isn't proof it doesn't exist. There will doubtless still be species of animal- eg. in the deepest part of the ocean that we haven't discovered. They exist- most likely. It's just, we haven't found them or given them some fancy Latin name. Maybe there's more proability for us that they are there because we understand that ecosystem more and what types of animals are able to live there. Celestial beings (if there are any,) we have no clue about.

Also, because something doesn't seem to make sense to our morality. Or, it seems incredibly cruel, that also doesn't prove that there isn't a God. They may just be a very cruel God or, one who has knowledge of a far greater plan which (for some unfathomable reason) requires beings to live (and suffer.)

I agree that our societies/ governments likely won't help (relatively) healthy people kill themselves. My argument more is that, unless someone has suffered deeply themselves, will they truly understand the risk they are exposing their children to? In some sense, surely it's easier for us to be antinatilist because we've witnessed ourselves how badly life can end up.

Or, put another way- were you so vehemently against life and procreation when your own life was better than it is now? Have you at any point thought having children was an ok thing to do?

do you think if there was a god i would want anything to do with him? absolutely not nothing this shit gets created by something intelligent i would never choose to come alive here for one thing life isn't guaranteed and want nothing to do with it, it's pointless existence in a pointless place

 

[Forever Sleep]

do you think if there was a god i would want anything to do with him? absolutely not nothing this shit gets created by something intelligent i would never choose to come alive here for one thing life isn't guaranteed and want nothing to do with it, it's pointless existence in a pointless place

If there is a God though, I doubt they'll give us the choice. Definitely though- we can choose not to procreate and inflict this mess on another being.

My reply was simply to try and express why some people- especially those who believe in a God may have different ideas on why life needs to exist. A member of my family is like this. They have a very firm belief that we actually choose our own lives- they believe in reincarnation. The idea almost disgusts me if I'm honest but- there we go, it's their belief.

Without categorically proving there isn't a God. And personally speaking, I don't think: There's no proof there is one, if there is one, they don't play fair, I don't want to believe in one- isn't actually categorical proof their isn't one. Then, it's impossible to say that non existence is the more preferable state because- you don't know for 100% sure that we don't exist prior to birth or, after death. Again, to reiterate- I actually largely agree with you. It's more this whole thing of stating things as facts when they are based on beliefs- or rather, non beliefs and personal perspective.

Really though, I do apologise actually because, you have the right to vent. I suppose I always feel the need to counterargue the more promortalist standpoint because it is so black and white when, so much of it is based on grey areas.

Would you agree that major decisions for the populace are made via obtaining a majority vote in a lot of countries? So, if the entire population could vote on (if they were able to choose,) whether they would have been born to begin with, what result do you think we'd get? I suspect, a vast majority 'yes' vote. Which means, you're imposing your views on the vast majority that non existence is better.

Of course, given your way, no one would exist to begin with to have that opinion... But we do and, you can't change that for the vast majority, only yourself and your choice to be antinatilist.

Unless you became a God. Then you could choose to be a God of nothing I suppose. Although, it sounds more likely you would create a super computer race. Would they be sentient? Would they realise they were alive? Would they be able to resent it and you for creating them?

Say someone you know becomes pregnant though. You may try to persuade them that bringing a child here is the ultimate evil. They'll likely disagree. The child may be born and disagree. It may end up having children of its own that disagree. Ultimately, you can't predict how other people will view their lives.

 

[ijustwishtodie]

I agree so much but most people are unable to comprehend this either due to some random religious view that they have or due to ego relating to how they want to procreate for their child to serve them and society. It isn't possible for a parent to have a child for the child's sake. I remember one time when my mum made me watch a random islamic lecture and how the lecturer talked about how it's our (i.e. the muslims) duty to protect our children from the harms within life and all I could think about was how contradictory this is because it's impossible to protect a child by giving birth to them. The only way to protect somebody is to not give birth to them in the first place.

Also, I've noticed that a lot of people including atheists actually see non existence as a bad thing due to the deprivationist account. A lot of them would rather stay into existence for as long as possible even if they suffered endlessly than be non existent. It's actually scary as to how much people value life