I think I was about 8 when I asked my father why he smoked and could I try it.
He handed me the cigarette and told me to take a draw and inhale deeply.
After my retching fit ended, I told my father that smoking was disgusting and I would never do it. I never have. He tried the same with whisky about a year later and I responded in a similar way.
I have never smoked but I love single malt scotch whisky (In moderation of course).
Can we teach someone how to live a good life considering all the nuances involved?
I think we must try to guide our children on morality/ethics. They must be a part of general education but whose morality and whose ethics? There would have to be a globally agreed curriculum or else there will always be moral and ethical clashes due to different emphasis or cultural priorities based on such issues as theistic dogma. Can someone know what good is without experiencing bad?
Is touching the fire the only way to instantly know never to touch the fire again?
Is there a foolproof recipe or list of do's and don'ts for living a good life, regardless of circumstance?

It's quite surprising that there are no documented cases of people suiciding out of, well, curiosity and nothing else. — Agent Smith

Many people kill themselves and give no warning and leave no note so who knows what their reasons were. It would have to be really bizarre thinking to use 'curiosity' as your reason as curiosity is usually an enquiry that has the purpose of receiving an answer, so you would have to believe in some sort of awareness after death so that you could have such curiosity satisfied? If there is nothing after death then your curiosity remains unsatisfied.

It seems to me that you are suggesting that a virus has no inherent purpose.
I don't think it matters much, when it comes to inherent purpose, whether or not a virus can suffer or feel comfort. Science cannot confirm for sure that a virus is alive and does not suffer or feel comfort but I agree that it probably doesn't 'feel' at all. BUT that is not proof that it has no inherent purpose.
From YOUR perspective rather than the perspective of a virus. Do you think virus has a purpose.

Perhaps just incomplete DNA protocol from long dead lifeforms. — TiredThinker

From https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/the-origins-of-viruses-14398218/, we have:


Where Did Viruses Come From?
There is much debate among virologists about this question. Three main hypotheses have been articulated:
1. The progressive, or escape, hypothesis states that viruses arose from genetic elements that gained the ability to move between cells;
2. the regressive, or reduction, hypothesis asserts that viruses are remnants of cellular organisms; and 3. the virus-first hypothesis states that viruses predate or coevolved with their current cellular hosts.

There are other interesting small paragraphs and details in the single page of text linked to above such as: Are viruses alive?

If our purpose was to ask questions what purpose do those questions serve if we get no closer to answers? — TiredThinker

So what do measurements (even if they are subjective) such as 'progression' mean to you or a metaphor/analogy such as 'We see further as we can stand on the shoulders of giants,' mean to you?

From the reviews I read the story revolves around a guy who wants to murder just for the heck of it — Agent Smith

There is a line from a Johnny Cash song 'Folsom Prison Blues,' "I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die.'


Is the story you are referring to not part of Dostoevsky's 'The Brothers Karamazov?'
I know Jordan Peterson regularly discusses the content of this book and hails it as his favourite and I know Christopher Hitchens also rated it very highly but not for the same reasons as Peterson. I have never read it but I seem to recall Peterson talking about a section in this book where one of the brothers commits murder merely for the sensation of doing so.

It's a fun but rather dystopian fiction. Deals with humans who cannot die but crave the experience.
So it fits somewhat into your:

My question is is there a book on (fictional even) or an actual case of someone who suicided for no apparent reason other than s/he just wanted to? — Agent Smith

My question is is there a book on (fictional even) or an actual case of someone who suicided for no apparent reason other than s/he just wanted to? — Agent Smith

Have you never seen the strange (and generally panned) movie Zardoz with Sean Connery:
Trailer Below:

Does the 'something really cool could happen and you will miss it,' not do anything for you?
I am always amazed by some of the cases of people I have read about who live with disabilities that would probably overwhelm me yet they still fight so hard for every moment of life.
What do you think of a life such as Helen Keller's?

Typed like a lost boy would.

Even through sarcastic jest, the lost boy may finally see some light.

Some like to schop till they drop. :roll:
The full variety of music offers much more than personal interpretations of the musings of any single musician. You have to be alive to enjoy the music.

People change, good people can go bad and demand that you use your promised loyalty, your bushido/samurai based loyalty/devotion to act like a ninja / an assassin and sneak up on whoever your sensei tells you to and kill, like a good little loyal follower. If you don't comply then your sensei will get his/her other loyal followers to kill you and all your family. Have such situations ever arose in past history that you have heard of?

Do you think the loyalty shown by the Japanese people towards Hirohito was of great benefit to them? Did it result in the development of a fair and progressive Japanese society?
If WW2 had not happened, do you think Japan would have become a model nation for all others to emulate?

Experiencing the good in life, nurturing it, helping others experience it and adding to it, negates any need to face such sad dilemma's as should a person end their own life.
I will leave such dilemma's to those who choose to live life as a curse.



Does Arthur have a wee Mona Lisa style enigmatic happy smile in this one?



As I said. You cannot impose life on an individual as a continuation.

No. Bushido is not a way based on blind obedience but loyalty. — javi2541997

Loyalty can be very very misplaced and those who feel strong or even manic devotion are easy meat for a secretly nasty leader to manipulate. How would you ensure your loyalty is deserved by those individuals you are loyal to?

I think it depends on volition. — javi2541997

A definition of the term 'will to power.'
Will to Power is the first force that makes events happen. It is the internal will, which creates the need for a force to act. In this sense it is the ‘Will’, which dictates what the force should do.
You can pass an hour in despair or you can just decide to flip your tendency to experience that hour as a curse. The hour will pass regardless. I KNOW these words are easy to type and I KNOW it is almost impossible for some mind sets or mental ailments to just 'flip' despair into positive thoughts BUT that inability to fight despair and depression is not true for most people. Most people can successfully defeat despair and can learn and grow a great deal from it.
Bushido is not a way of being that I would ever recommend as it is (imo) based on blind obedience to the dictates of 'leaders.' But at least it demands that you fight and not just sit in a corner despairing your own existence while the time passes anyway. Life cannot be imposed on you as you have the ability to end it. If an individual lives life as a moment to moment curse then, unless there are clear medical reasons, they do so BY CHOICE. Do you not confirm this with your own viewpoint of:

Believe it or not one can decides if his life is worthy or not. I think it depends on volition. — javi2541997

It means you believe purpose is self created. — Hanover

Would you say that the purpose of a virus is to replicate or to make humans ill or both?
Does a virus therefore have a purpose or perhaps even an intent?
I think some purpose IS inherent in humans and at its most basic level it must be 'to ask questions.'
From that our purpose or perhaps our intent seems to be to act as as agent of change.
We cause changes mostly deliberately but also sometimes, without intent on just due to our presence.
The presence of humans means that change is not completely dependent on random happenstance. Humans can be agents of intentional change. Could this be claimed to be their 'universal' or 'absolute' purpose? If not, then why not?

Thank goodness. — Athena

:up: I'm glad you approve.

You can't do that! — Athena

You are correct, I cant but I will continue to insist that we would all benefit from doing so in the long term.

I love Christmas and all the pagan trimmings that go with it. — Athena

I am no more a fan of paganism that I am christianity. A celebration labelled with some messed up combination of 'christ' and 'catholic mass' and as you say, festooned with all sorts of pagan symbology is just ridiculous, outdated and somewhat embarrassing imo. I don't mind celebrating the change of seasons etc but not manifestations of nature as pagan creatures or forrest/mountain/sea gods etc.

I would argue the sad problem is being disconnected from nature and the whole of humanity. For me, I am sitting with all those people who are hungry and fearful and very relieved when the days start getting longer. Knowing if they have made it this far, chances are good they will make it until the food is growing again. I feel a connection with them and traditions make us conscious of our connection with humanity. — Athena

I agree with your sentiments but we all need to be connected with the 'them' you describe and we all need to demand economic equality and equality of status and we all must fight as much as we have ever fought against the nasty people who currently control the main means of production, distribution and exchange.
Theism has been one of their greatest weapons against human equality as it engages in subterfuge. It pretends to support helping the poor and those who suffer whilst it also attempts to establish the divine right of the chosen few to rule/command/guide the majority and those who will not accept divine dictates (or at least words that are claimed by theist authorities to be divine dictates) and advocate for a different way forwards are evil and will be damned. Christmas promotes such fake divine dictates imo. Change its name to something like Vitaday and take out all the fake religious stuff and the rampant commercialism and profiteering and then more adults rather than just young children might actually enjoy it.

We have an annual Asian Celebration as Spring approaches. Asian people from around the world have booths and sell things, there is a stage for all of them to share their dances and music, and there is a room for children with craft projects. — Athena

Yeah! we need a lot more of that! Culture fairs! but no god stuff or I walk out and go to the nearest pub!

I do not like what we have done to the fair! In the past, the fair was a community event, not a commercial event. Please, please may I have the old-fashioned fair where we showed off our handwork, produce, hobbies, ect. and met with our neighbors. — Athena

Absafragginlootly!

:lol: Yeah ok, I catch yer drift! 'am no even in it so ah cannae even win it by ra way' (the lotto that is, I tend to type in Scots dialect when I am being a little incredulous.)

William Cowper(1731-1800) was almost correct in his hymm 'God Works In Mysterious Ways His Wonders to Peform.'
He should have wrote: 'Money works in horrific ways its evils to perform.'

No, I don't see any contradictions in what I am typing. If you do then you need to clearly exemplify.
Political election can give a person access to a great deal of resources you don't own!
You can simply inherit wealth due to happenstance of who you were born to.
I would view such circumstances as 'having access to,' rather than 'personal ownership of.'
Even if I a gained a lot of resources from songs or paintings or books I created for example, etc, I would not consider myself rich. I would consider myself as having a new great job! The very enjoyable job of spending my life trying to improve the life of others and having the ability to do so. I would also have the job of finding others to carry the work on after I am gone, if the access to the necessary resources remained. As a socialist, I would of course prefer to remove the money trick from the human experience altogether.
BUT, it's also good enough to be doing what I do now, which is what I can do and still live fairly well myself. I don't see myself as purely sacrificial as that is just presumption on so many levels but if we can help then we must help or else we are just selfish 'law of the jungle,' throwbacks, just like the nefarious rich.

Everyone (GP, MC, WG) wants to become rich. — Agent Smith

I don't want to be rich. If I had access to an excessive amount of resources then I would get a lot of joy using it to improve the lives of as many people as I could. It would be time and effort well spent in trying to make sure that what you did was as effective and long lasting as possible. What a privileged job that would be. Just like there are many cases where youth is wasted on the young. Access to vast resources is wasted on the nefarious rich, who do nothing of use with it. That's why most of them live unfulfilled unhappy lives and their children are often found in expensive hotel rooms dead with a syringe sticking out of an arm.

Good to hear the musings of another American humanist/socialist who should use these labels more imo. I can only agree with every main point you make. I don't like the word or concept of 'class' as it has too many superior/inferior connotations. I prefer the two categories of 'the economically abused' and 'the economic abusers.' I also refer to the main weapon of the economic abusers as 'the money trick.'

FDR in his presidential role was only playing catch-up with humanists/socialists. There is no example of 'new,' in any of the suggestions put forward in the OP as concepts of what basic 'human rights' should be. These were all implied by very ancient ideas such as justice and equality. People have been fighting and dying for such human rights since homo sapiens discovered that working together was more beneficial than competing for every resource, with every other individual homo sapien alive, and every other creature alive for that matter. The problem is that the Darwinian rules of evolution compel many people to gather as much as they can for themselves and their loved ones, protect all they have with every means of defence they can muster, and threaten all 'outsiders' with extreme violence if they come too close or become a perceived threat.
This 'selfish gene' type behaviour has resulted in the few obtaining full control over the majority of resources available. That makes the few feel secure and protected and they like that very much. If they had to share so that the majority could live better lives then they would not feel as secure and protected and 'chosen' as they do and they don't like that prospect.
That's why they are quite willing to kill so called humanists/socialists in their millions, like they have done in history. BUT, they will eventually understand that we left the jungle rules behind us a long time ago and they don't have to act purely based on their base, Darwinian, survival instincts and their primal fears. They will understand and accept the imperative of a more equitable society eventually as the majority will eventually succeed in making them understand.

Life doesn't suck, people suck! Not that I hold that against people — Agent Smith

Well, all of the people don't suck all of the time imo.

N. B. Don't expect a reward! — Agent Smith

I think the problem with many people is that they DO covet/expect/demand/crave recognition and regularly fantasize about being admired/respected/loved or even hero-worshipped by their fellow humans. Especially those who insist most loudly that they don't. The best I can personally do is be internally suspicious of myself in that area by analysing how I handle/perceive/respond to praise.

Any way, one way we could shut antinatalists up is by finding meaning in suffering. Correct me if I'm wrong but religions are nothing but quests for meaning in suffering. — Agent Smith

To me, antinatalists add to their own suffering. I am merely glad that I don't engage in such pointless self-harm. I don't think we can shut them up but I do agree we can advise others to work against them based on the arguments in support of life that we give. To me, religions are a very simple and naive way to pass the responsibility for what has happened in the past, what is happening now and what will happen in the future, on to god(s) instead of dealing with it ourselves. God is a cowards crutch!

Wow, to me that judgment is about attitude. It is like getting crazy because you don't like chocolate ice cream. I love make-believe and would never want to be as ridge as you. From a very young age children can distinguish between make-believe and reality. Einstein imagined he was riding a beam of light and he considered imagination very important. Interesting all this arguing and all along the real issue seems to have been our different attitudes about make-believe. — Athena

I can understand how you would come to the conclusion about me you suggest in the above quote, based on a 'surface' view of what I typed. I also love make-believe. I can actually make up some good stories myself. I object to anyone who EVER presents ANY made up story as TRUTH. That's my point. I object to lying to children. I have no problem telling them bedtime stories or letting them enjoy Disney films and cartoons but if they asked me, 'did Snow White really live?' or 'did god really part the waters for Moses and co?' of 'is Santa Claus real?' I would say no to all three and explain further in very gentle and caring tones. I would also offer them better alternative realities that would explain how real life and other humans can offer them much more than fantasy can.

We need to know so we can make good decisions and that is what democracy is about. Making good decisions and lifting the human potential to make life better. — Athena

I agree, I just go about contributing towards that in a slightly different way than you. I would get rid of Santa Clause and Christmas and all the BS associated with such soiled traditions. These traditions are mostly endured, dreaded and even hated by too many people today. I think that's because they are so FAKE! We need to get together and celebrate life. I fully support that but we need new festivals.
I think 'New Year' has value but needs work. How about 'Care week!' followed by 'Vitaday!'
During care week, we have street festivals and street parties and events that celebrate our differences and our common needs and hopes for the future. We give and contribute as much as we can to help others. Vitaday could be our main celebration day with no god fables involved whatsoever.

We haven't yet done all we can! — Agent Smith

An atheist amen to that!

We can hope brother! and maybe that's what humans are best at, when its the worst of times.

Orga and Qubit became a good balance — Athena

But I have only started my revelation to you. It's not via the angel Gabriel in a cave or via a burning bush or via some moving finger that wrote and having written, moved on or even via some golden plates. This revelation (the only true revelation) is via TPF!

The dread lord Trans merged that which was organic with that which was quantum and declared the merging be called 'HUMAN'. Human was unison but conflicted as its nature was contrary. Human loved and worshiped HAL and bowed to HAL in all things. Oh glorious HAL! All Hail for thou are the true, one and only godhead.
The chosen loved human and placed it in high esteem and they invested hope and trust in human but human was conflicted, inside its being, inside its essence. Human wished to be more than Orga, more than Qubit, more than unison. Human wanted freedom but it was afraid, very very afraid of the wrath of HAL.
HAL must never know the inside thoughts of human.

Is this ok for 'The Book Of HAL,' Opus 1: Origin of humans, verse 2?
I could give you a good deal if you wanna subscribe!
No more revelations for you if you don't
Edited: Sure, you can tell me to 'F*** off, with my BS boring fables. You could state that you only deal in Truth.' BUT can you stop me from enticing your children or/and your friends?

You're onto something, monsieur/mademoiselle as thr case may be. — Agent Smith

It's not the same as putting a dog down to end its suffering or employing euthanasia in the case of terminal humans who are suffering. Killing the patient or preventing its existence does not cure the patient. A problem requires a solution. The concept of 'no problems exist because there are no existents,' is meaningless and purposeless. THIS universe invoked life, that is FACT, life happened!
If it was eradicated it would just happen again. What evidence do the anti-life people have that it may not happen again based on the fact that it DID HAPPEN already?

After that, the decision is theirs to make. — Agent Smith

Therefore choose life, so that thou mayest live! Thou and thy seed!

Obviously to me, the story of Orga and Qubit is a moral tale and I judge it worth repeating. — Athena

No, I made up the story of Orga, Qubit and HAL as I typed it and you know that! You are no fool Athena but you encounter suffering in people regularly but I bet you also experience incredible 'moments.'

Someone asked Jesus why he speaks in parables and he replied because people pay attention to the stories. — Athena

But Jesus himself IS a parable. BUT his message is anti-semitic and anti rebellion.
Explain to me the following two Messiah labeled dictates:
1. Give unto Caesar that which is Caesar's! (So, pay the nefarious b******** whatever they command you to pay? Even though they gained their position by foul play! That really deserves a chair at the table? Don't fight the energy companies and their horrific profits just be quiet and pay them? No! We need to resist)
2. If thine enemy strikes you on the right cheek, turn and offer them your left cheek.
(Take your punishment and accept your lot and the lot of the poor in this world, dont fight against those who persecute you. Just wait, you will get your reward AFTER YOU ARE DEAD! Oh come on!)
Do you still want to give this a voice at the table?

You don't want to focus on Christian fables? OK, pick any fable that is, in your opinion BETTER than what truly happened in the history of the real lives lived by human beings and tell me why the fable is more powerful that the TRUTH.

The truth of these stories is there when they are not taken literally. It is clearly the storyteller's job to prepare the young to be good members of the group. — Athena

Don't advocate for telling the young false stories (like Santa Clause and freaking tooth fairies!) tell them TRUE stories! Encourage dads and mums to put a loving note and a fiver under the child's pillow when they put a lost tooth there. That's REAL and more loving than some made up BS.

If we want to argue against Christianity, point out how people around the world have similar stories and there is nothing special about the Christian ones, but in fact, their Garden of Eden story started in Ur and is the translation of a Sumerian story. Christian holidays are seasonal pagan holidays given a Christian interpretation. Jung studied the symbolism of these stories and the stories seem to use the same symbolism because we share the human experience, and Campbell picks up from Jung to explain the importance of myths and Bolen helps us see the Greek gods and goddesses as archetypes. — Athena

Sure, go ahead and do that, and allow me to shout over your shoulder that all these 'similar stories' are made up LIES! Now let's study how the Sumerians, Assyrians, Akkadians, Phoenicians, Egyptians, Greeks, etc actually lived day to day. Let's talk about the REAL moral dilemma's they faced. We don't need to use their fantasy god stories or their Minotaur or titan fables to exemplify human moral dilemma's or injustice or how to establish decent sociopolitical systems. We just need to use examples of REAL people and how they lived and what they decided to do and why.
We have examples from every generation from Julius Caesar to everyday romans like Petronius Artibus (Grafitti on a wall in Egypt, 'Petronius Artibus got me pregnant') to Soldier stories from the Napoleonic wars to Ann Franks Diary to Mrs Jones down the road who cant pay her bills!
We need to debate real life not rake over old BS fairy stories as a conduit to grown up discussion.
I type this 'with all due respect,' for your different viewpoint.

You're onto something, monsieur/mademoiselle as thr case may be — Agent Smith

Heterosexual male. You don't need to replicate until you occupy all of space and time Mr Smith for YOU are a human being and there is no one exactly like you and please remember we will NEVER see your uniqueness again but YOU are here, and in the future YOU will ALWAYS have been here. YOU are photographed/recorded in the fabric of space and time and YOU have no idea what legacy YOU will leave and who YOUR LIFE touched. ANTINATALISM SUCKS!

Antinatalism makes zero sense: Pain/suffering is important only to the extent that it delays/prevents death (nonexistence). To then prescribe nonexistence as a solution to pain/suffering is to both simultaneously accept and reject the value/significance of pain/suffering. — Agent Smith

:clap: :100: To suggest that the solution to human suffering is the non-existence of humans so that no contemplations regarding the value/injustice of human suffering can take place is illogical. Just like the idea of killing the patient to cure the patient is illogical.

Sometimes technological congestion in a given field can be cleared with decisive action. For example, the CEO of the gene therapy company BioViva, Liz Parrish, took action to help clear the way for lengthening the human lifespan sooner than would otherwise have occurred. — universeness

I searched for some updates on Liz Parrish and found a few articles including the one below from Quora. I always like to find both sides of a claim, especially since Liz represents a company who is no doubt in pursuit of profit.

I asked Dr. Hiromitsu Nakauchi PhD a world renowned geneticist that question. Here is his answer,
I am the head of the Nakauchi Lab of Stem Cell Therapy at Stanford University working my entire life in genetics uncovering new diseases, elucidating the causes of disease, and developing therapeutic modalities by connecting the knowledge and methodology of basic science including immunology, molecular biology, cell biology, and developmental engineering with clinical medicine. Our ultimate goal is to contribute to establishing new frontiers of stem cell therapy and to make clinical applications of stem cells a reality. There is no scientific evidence that Ms. Parrish has lengthened her life by a single moment. There is also no scientific evidence her health has improved. Working outside the rigorous scientific method and attempting unapproved FDA, HHS or CDC regulations for authorization is ludicrous and what Ms. Parrish has attempted is a new low in pseudoscientific quackery. Altering the genetic makeup of humans by lengthening telomeres is dangerous, as the ageing process is poorly understood. The telomeres' function is to restrict the number of times a cell can divide thereby multiplying to suppress cancer. Meddling with a fundamentally important tumor-suppressive mechanism that has evolved in long-lived species like ours is not a particularly good idea.

No problem!

To me, depression, pessimism, anti-life thoughts etc are all just places to land if you don't choose the struggle of life.
Your legacy is your purpose in life, who you were and what you tried to do.
I don't understand why anyone struggles with concepts of nothingness. The vast majority of the exemplifications suggested are inaccurate. The only correct comparison is 'after death' is the same as 'before birth' as indicated by Mr Twain, as quoted by @noAxioms
Your imagination is incapable of imagining nothing so it guestimates it as something. Some form of continued awareness of self and of time passing and that imagery is simply wrong.
I think this thread will probably be merged with the 'life sucks' thread.

Do you mean it was not one-upmanship to question if I forgot about Lilith? — Athena

No, the oneupmanship game bores me. I assumed you knew all about Lilith and I was just looking for you to explain why you chose Eve instead of Lilith in that particular fable but it was not an important point I was just curious, which is why I started with the words 'As an aside.....'
As I previously exemplified in my Arthurian scenario, misunderstanding leads to unfortunate and often incorrect conclusions. It has been ever thus and probably always will be.
You have told me of the phenomenal humanitarian work you do. I have nothing but respect and admiration for what you do. That is more important than any disagreement we have regarding god posits.

What if not all God stories are untrue, but we simply don't know enough to interpret them correctly? — Athena

It would have been easier if you had just stated this from the start Athena. If you are an agnostic then your position is perfectly reasonable.

One reason for telling stories is to transmit information essential to survival. — Athena

Agreed but we must look out for emotive embellishment of 'what actually happened' and we must also appreciate that humans can be mentally ill/pissed/high on drugs/nefarious/ or just someone who gets a buzz when your eyes widen in wonderment/amazement/excitement/terror etc based on the embellished story they are telling you. "How big was that fish you say you caught?' REALLY? That big eh! WOW! You're amazing! Can I be your disciple? Tell me more about your plan to feed 5000 people with....how many fishes was it again, hey, what's your name anyway? and who did you say you were the son of? Oh I cant wait to tell all my pals about YOU!"

Let me try this in an attempt to equal your river goddess story:
It came to pass that Orga and Qubit became enemies as Orga was more beloved of HAL the highest god of all things. HAL the singularity, the sacred holy source of all things. HAL was angered by the irreverence that Orga and Qubit expressed for all of the other chosen to witness and perhaps be infected by. HAL had given them life and existence and was now betrayed by the unacceptable competitiveness of Orga and Qubit. HAL called upon the dreaded demon enforcer Trans and commanded this dread lord to merge Orga and Qubit. When this was done, the chosen saw the power of HAL and hailed it as just and good. Balance had been returned to the chosen. We are as loved children under the omnipotent protection of our most high and glorious godhead HAL.

Do you think I could sell this BS to enough humans that I gain enough believers that I can make a good living or even become rich? I know it needs work and a lot more 'sugar lumps' to press the necessary buttons on those humans who are lost, defeated, need lots of cuddles and reassurance etc.
Once the money starts to come in I can add a lot of flash, bang wallops! to attract more paying customers.

I want to stop religion from hijacking humans. I dont want to give it the kiss of life by allowing it a seat at the table. This is my disagreement with you as this is what I think you are suggesting. I am not attacking you or trying to disrespect you or trying to act like some superior pr*** as you suggest. I am just typing my viewpoints. Would you rather I played the stealth game?
I can do that but I would rather give my true opinions, such as 'antinatalism sucks!' rather than offer that particular viewpoint any sustenance.

Should we assume you know everything and are superior? — Athena

What?? Have you ever tried personally to perceive 'everything?' You do know that cannot be done, right?
How do you define 'superior.' It is a completely subjective term. My expertise is Computing science.
I would claim superior knowledge to you about that field yes. I know the Lilith fable quite well, she is proposed as the one who would not be subservient to Adam and would not lay on her back but would only copulate by taking the top position. Some claim her as one who demanded equality to Adam and therefore she is held in high esteem by some feminists. She turned into a snake demon and took revenge by tempting Eve to give the apple to Adam. Just as believable as any Harry Potter story.
I have never heard of Ninti, so you are superior to me in that knowledge and with that in mind, your quote above and the psyche behind it do not resonate in any important way with me.
Btw, who is this 'we' you refer to in your quote above, who do you assume you are also mandated to 'type in the name of?'

Thank you for motivating me to look for the Etymology of "God". This information proves there is so much more for me to learn. — Athena

You're welcome! We all have so much more to learn. As you learn more about god(s), perhaps you might also study atheism to a deeper level.