No. Antinatalism is kind of like communism: it's a good philosophy for some undetermined point in the distant future. A lofty goal to one day aspire to. As I've explained before, antinatalism ignores the vast majority of suffering in the world by limiting the scope of our concerns to "new humans". If humans all stopped having children today and our species died out in 100 years, suffering would not be eliminated. The cycle of creating new life only for it to suffer would not end. Humanity has a moral obligation to serve as the Annihilator - to end all life - before we're free to retire. At the very least we need a Deathwatch Vanguard to continue breeding until all life is ended.
Antinatalism is human egocentrism.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2021-02-27 at 8:58 PM UTC
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
2021-02-27 at 9:03 PM UTC
Sudo
Black Hole
[my hereto riemannian peach]
If I was slightly more autistic I'd write a paper tying Jane Buddhism to antinatalism but alas I also have adhd and a hillbillies vocabulary. Somebody kill me
2021-02-27 at 9:23 PM UTC
Malice was ahead of his time
2021-03-10 at 8:39 AM UTC
aldra
JIDF Controlled Opposition
what is the point? of either continuing to exist or forcing its end
is it purely survival? I can't accept that