Capitalism, the money trick, the manipulation of supply and demand are all methods used by the nefarious to make themselves rich and powerful and create a low status / powerless majority poor. The cycle then continues from generation to generation by capitalism so that the few can leech from the poor to maintain their power and status. Socialists/humanists etc have been fighting against all doctrines which help to maintain this imbalance since we came out of the wilds. The answer to this imbalance is to work towards balance and dismantle and prevent systems which produce rich and poor people and powerful and powerless people. The answer to such human problems is not and never has been to support notions of anti-life as that means you have become part of the problem and have become every bit as imbalanced, destructive and as much a part of the problem as a capitalist/autocrat/plutocrat/aristocrat/monarchist/totalitarian/evanhellical etc etc. We need to alleviate and eventually cure/prevent the suffering not vote for making all patients extinct.

Transhumanism is literally death anxiety. — Darkneos

Nonesense! — universeness

Just a little more on this. Transhumanism seeks more control over the inevitability of death and there may be an aspect of death anxiety as one of the drivers but you ignore the absolute practicality of improving human choices, robustness, ability and longevity. Space is not life-friendly in the main at the moment and it is very advisable that humans become an interplanetary or even interstellar species asap.
It is a pragmatic survival imperative. We must leave the nest as we are too vulnerable if we stay confined to one planet. Feel free to label this concern 'extinction anxiety.' Having improved robustness, ability and longevity will help us survive in the vastness of space. All power to transhumanism! as long any enhancements will maintain at least the majority of what is considered human identity or me, myself and I ....... and of course you.

No, that's just a claim. There is nothing to say the world wouldn't end if I died. — Darkneos

The law of the conservation of energy is not a claim, the clue is in the title. There is indeed a frame of reference that suggests that from your point of view, the Universe ends when you die. In reality, it might take many trillions of years for all life to truly end in the universe but as you will not experience time passing after you are dead, trillions of years and an instant will be all the same to you. This was also the case before you were born. Just as well you were formed and became alive or else you and all other antilifers would not have ever been able to complain about your existence.

Transhumanism is literally death anxiety. — Darkneos

Nonesense!

Hope is little more than delusion that promises what it can't deliver. — Darkneos

I am with Alexander Pope. Hope springs eternal.

Why indeed but that's not really an argument to continue living. — Darkneos

Perhaps not for you.
You are 'overruling' natural instinct. I am glad that humans can do that or else we could not overrule a Darwinian law of the jungle approach to life but as I said before, I am glad I don't carry your self-imposed cage in which you experience your life as a moment to moment curse.

Also "unjust", "unnecessary"? That's casting an awful lot of assumptions onto existence. — Darkneos

So you disagree with the antinatalists that its immoral to have kids due to the existence of unneccessary and unjust harms/suffering?

since a universe with life is just as purposeless as one without it. There is no ultimately point to existence, it simply persists. — Darkneos

So I suppose you see terms like 'human progress' or 'legacy' or 'lives building on lives' or 'compulsion to find the answers to the big questions,' or 'I feel its my purpose in life to.....,' etc to be purposeless. You employ a very strange and unconvincing form of logic. Quite irrational actually.

But you're in the wrong here. I universe without life sounds amazing. I would like to "live" in it, ironic I know, to bask in the absolute silence of it all. For however long I last, and then know with my death extinction of all life would at last occur — Darkneos

Perhaps we could scientifically test how much you would enjoy this by placing you in a simulation of complete sensory deprivation. We could remove 'ironic' and allow you to actually "live" it.
We can use chemicals to temporarily paralyse you and completely remove your sense of touch. Temporarily remove your sight, hearing and sense of smell and taste. No sensory input whatsoever. We could leave you like that whilst still maintaining your bodily functions for 10 years. We can then reinstate your senses and you can describe your bliss to the human race. There are many 'locked in' medical conditions which are not so far from this state such as Encephalitis lethargica as depicted in the film awakenings. We would of course leave your brain working in the same way it does now so that your experience would be 'live' as you wanted instead of the 'no awareness' offered by death. We can induce 8 hours of sleep for you in each 24h period. Would you volunteer for this 'living death' experiment?

Pleasant instrumental sound but I much prefer the invocations of Jean Michele Jarre, Mike Oldfield or even Vangelis!

As a representative of the Universe, I have a voice within it. I choose to speak in support of the Universes demonstrated preference to create life. I am even content with referring to such as pure happenstance but the survival instinct being so strong in all species is further evidence towards a universe of purpose than one without purpose. Philosophical wordplay is no substitute for what actually happened and continues to happen. The existence of life happened and its human manifestations are compelled to ask questions, therefore its purpose is established, despite any attempts at sophistic wordplay.

The moderators of this site insist that I be nicer to antinatalists. I don't want to be nicer to them but I am threatened with getting banned if I don't and I have already had what I considered to be a very reasonable thread removed regarding the issue of falling foul of discussion site guidelines or the ruminations of individual moderators/administrators so, as I don't wish to be accused of throwing my own toys out of my pram. I will try to comply with their request, but it's not easy.

Agreed and life affirmation is already based on sound science imo.
Matter survived and continues to do so against antimatter annihilation and imo, it follows that life will continue to survive against antilife! The Universe will produce life because that is what it did and that is what it does!

I was only responding within the context of the value framework that some pessimists have wherein the absence of life's goods isn't bad because you wouldn't have any needs. Well, if that is true, then the fact that we wouldn't be remembered by everyone long after we are gone should not be a problem (or a blessing), considering that we wouldn't exist to lose or gain from that. To summarise, one should not be inconsistent — DA671

As I have said many times, to me, the fundamental is a question of purpose. A universe devoid of life has no purpose that I can conceive of. Such pointlessness is far worse than any concept of undeserved harms human morality or human moralists can come up with. I vote for many more years of harms and suffering for humans, including those who some choose to label 'newborn innocents,' alongside the many many joys and wonders of life which also occur very regularly. I very much prefer this state, compared to the alternative of a lifeless, pointless universe. All good people will also, of course, continue to do exactly what you have suggested many times. We will continue to help alleviate and remove all forms of unjust and unnecessary suffering and even obtain far more control over the inevitability of death.

I would also ask this. Why is the survival instinct so strong in all species if purposeless nonexistence is the superior natural state? Something seems to me to be much better than nothing!

All the points you make are valid, but as I said, this situation is changing. Think of how much information will be available to future generations about the lives of their ancestors. Current technology can hold every photograph, every textual or audio word you ever recorded, every piece of footage you ever recorded. You can gather it and back it up to a single SSD and to 'cloud storage' and pass the whole lot to your offspring as legacy files. This will now be available for the rest of time! To all future generations.
In what ways will such information be employed a million years from now? We will be the 'ancients' at that point. I wonder how they will judge the anti-life people alive today? I predict they will be unfavourable towards them based on the fact that sentient life will still be thriving a million years from now. If no such sentient life exists a million years from now then it won't matter anyway. If antilife wins then there will be nothing around to declare their victory. Perhaps anti-life is inevitable in the same way as anti-protons or antimatter or antichrist. Universal balance seems to be the norm. The good thing about the anti story is that matter won the battle of annihilation! Life defeated antilife long ago. That battle has already been decided. Time to get on with life!

if value dies with existence — DA671

I don't think this has ever been true as most parents attempt to nurture and teach their offspring how to survive and even how best to thrive in the world they live in. The level of legacy and influence that humans achieve is what makes the difference. From word of mouth traditions to the invention of methods to record (hieroglyphics, books etc) experiences and happenings, outside of the body, so that they last much longer than a human lifespan is the main reason why we gained dominion against all other species.

The good that matters for us (which transhumanism can also help provide) whilst we exist is not diminished/improved by the opinions of the posterity. — DA671

I am not sure what you mean here. The most unfortunate aspect of history is the distortion of truth and the manipulation of 'what really happened,' so I think the 'opinions of the posterity,' is crucial, especially, if those opinions are based on seriously dubious historical reportage such as those offered by theistic texts or historical events which were exclusively reported on by those in power at the time or those who conquered. History is rarely written by the vanquished.

The vast majority of people that have died before us are unknown and haven't left such an individual mark that we would remember them as historical figures. — ssu

Just a little bit more on this. I know some people who have traced the ancestry of their family and can describe a good deal of detail about many members of their family that go back centuries.
Historical figures that are known globally is just the tip of the iceberg compared to the information that does actually exist about the lives of non-famous people who lived. I find this quite wonderful.
I still remember a little about an everyday Roman soldier called Petronious Artibus because of some graffiti that was left about him. One stated 'Petronious Artibus got me pregnant!'

Yet helping others, bringing them happiness, make us feel good (at least me). And yes, people usually don't whine about their problems. Yet I don't think that humble and genuinely humanist people are totally indifferent about their own life. They don't want their lives to end. — ssu

I completely agree!

WELL DONE SIR!! A great legacy!
— universeness
Is that sarcasm, universeness? If so, why? — ssu

No! I think anyone who has a successful marriage and has produced children and has managed to bring them up in a loving environment and they have all reached old age and continue to thrive is a very good (or great) legacy. Perhaps my use of capitals made you suspicious that I was being sarcastic, maybe its normal in today's society where most people are still a little shell shocked from Trumpism, Bo Jo etc that all comments/compliments made by people you don't know are treated with suspicion.
I am sure there is a lot more significance to the legacy your life will leave than a loving marriage and reproduction but such achievements ARE in themselves very good components of your legacy.

The vast majority of people that have died before us are unknown and haven't left such an individual mark that we would remember them as historical figures. — ssu

This imo, is more true the further you go back in time than it is now. I already stated my general opinion in my response to darkneous above:

Modern techniques store more and more information about our individual lives so future people will get to know a lot more about the lives of past people if they wish to. Future transhumanism has the potential to offer humans vastly improved robustness, ability and longevity. This will offer many new options — universeness

I think we have been, in the main, on the same page in our viewpoints on this topic.

But I know that looking at the determination of animals in the wilderness, that's what I call living. They have enough energy pent up inside them that when they spring into action, all those energy is released like superpowers. Relatively, they live a short life -- when you always give your all and use all your energy to bag a prey, you're bound to have a shorter life. The wear and tear you sustain makes you powerful, but also short-lived. — L'éléphant

:clap: In general and in history, I think non-humans have suffered more than humans. I wonder how many lions or lambs decide that life and living is just a bad idea and they should covet death instead? Why does the prey run from the predator when they offer the placid oblivion of death and I don't think that they would have the same concerns as @Darkneos that they might survive the attempt to cause their own termination. Surely that strong survival instinct that has already been mentioned many times and that all species seem to have must have important purpose behind it.

Yeah, but when it really comes to our own lives, we are all such egoist whimps. — ssu

This is true for some but we have many people amongst us who are very humble and genuinely humanist. They just get on with helping people every day and hardly mention their own suffering. When you compliment them or show them admiration they tend to shrink away, truly embarrassed.
They are imo much more numerous, among the poor and weak than among the famous/rich and strong.
Incredible unsung hero like everyday people exist in all our communities. I am not suggesting such people are perfect but they certainly easily compensate for those I would label misanthropic.

But at least I had them and a loving wife, so one notch to the "successful human/animal life"-table. — ssu

WELL DONE SIR!! A great legacy!

Well you can't really be sure about that. — Darkneos

Yes I can. Science has very strong empirical evidence for The law of Conservation of Energy, which states that “Energy cannot be created or destroyed.” In other words, the total amount of energy in the universe never changes, it can only change from one form to another. It is actually quite unlikely that after you die, some of your disassembled subatomic particles will never be involved in any new combination events until the end of the universe. YOU will be recycled.

your point about disassembling is what Ernest Becker would call inventing stories to assuage death anxiety, — Darkneos

I can only assure you and Mr Becker(in memorium) that I have no such death anxiety and I would suggest that you are simply trying to project your own anxiety onto me. I love life and will welcome death as a harbinger of change. I fear and I am anxious about the way I will die but I have no fear of oblivion for the obvious reason that there is no awareness.

Also you will be forgotten, transhumanism ain't gonna fix that. — Darkneos

You have no information regarding the legacy I will leave so you have no idea as to how long I will be remembered. Modern techniques store more and more information about our individual lives so future people will get to know a lot more about the lives of past people if they wish to. Future transhumanism has the potential to offer humans vastly improved robustness, ability and longevity. This will offer many new options. If you stick around you may witness its infancy. If you don't then there are many newborns to replace you. The global population has been increasing since we came out of the wilds.

Anti-life is completely futile as the universe has clearly demonstrated that if life can happen, it will happen, somewhere at some point, again and again and again. Death just means you disassemble back into the spare subatomic parts you were made from. You dissipate back into the universal mix, all of what you were will be used again in new variations and new combinations. Nothing to be afraid of. The little life variation you were is gone forever but you will not be forgotten if you leave a respectable legacy and future transhumanism may offer many more options.
Looking at the examples available from natural selection and the evolutionary process, I think anyone anti-life should beware. The Darwinian rules don't seem to have many moral imperatives that humans would consider 'fair' or 'just.' If you invoke the Darwinian rules then that is what you personally might get.
The best hope for anyone antilife is the fact that those who love life care enough to try to convince them to think differently. We are their only hope against becoming spare parts for new life forms or any new animate or inanimate combination/structure way before they needed to due to their own confused choices.
The only value I see in them is they offer me a level of personal reflection and confirm for me how bad things can get on a personal level. I can say to myself 'well, at least you are not choosing to live life as some kind of daily, hour-to-hour curse.'
I assume anti-lifers struggle when nice things happen to them and to others around them as feeling good must be painful for them.

Because I'm not a coward. Lots of things in life will try to tear you down and end you. All the cells inside of you fight every day to keep viruses and bacteria at bay. They fight to do their jobs, and live. You spit on that. All the people who spent time and effort raising you to continue life. You spit on that. The fact that you have the gift of sentience when so much matter in the universe will never have it. Its absolutely a waste to throw that away when you should fight for it. — Philosophim

:up: :clap:

:flower:

I enjoyed reading the responses to the OP on this thread.
I don't feel the need to add anything to the general 'choose life!' message, firmly delivered.
I am sure I have an old faded 80's Wham 'CHOOSE LIFE' T-shirt somewhere in a drawer. Sadly, it won't fit me anymore but I might dig it out and stare at it for a while. Memories of past happy moments are also quite life-affirming. At least for me, anyway.

That’s why the search for a reason to live or argument why not suicide. — rossii

Think of all the cool stuff that might happen, that you will miss if your not around. Maybe we will be visited by aliens, maybe Donald Trump will convert to humanism, maybe science will find some new answers, maybe people's lives will get better, they have got very much better imo since we first came out of the wilds, maybe a good person will love you, maybe a new child in your family will give you renewed purpose and hope, maybe someone else will learn something from you that helps them, maybe you will make a difference somewhere, maybe your favourite food ever will be discovered by you soon, maybe you will watch a show that makes you laugh harder and longer than you have ever laughed before. Maybe you don't know just how important you are to the lives of others that have never told you so or maybe you will become so.
Your like may in fact be incredibly rare in the vast Universe.
Immerse yourself in the wonders of life.
The song below can sound pessimistic, yet the advice from Thom Yorke at the end is: Immerse yourself in love.

kjh

I think we could get to Proxima and Barnard's star etc by making 'stepping stone stations' along the way.
Might take a while though!

Only sci fi offers solutions to interstellar or intergalactic travel. Wormholes/space warping(folding),subspace/hyperspace/stargates etc.
We are on our way to meeting up with the stars and planets of the Andromeda Galaxy. Perhaps at the end of that event we will have some newbies, moved in, close by!
Carl Sagan seemed to feel that the wormhole idea was the most plausible for his book/movie Contact.
I have always trusted Carl's ideas.

Some issues are more important than others as are some choices. Universal AN as @DA671 labels it would END OUR SPECIES! so it does not compare with choosing whether or not an individual eats meat.

As has been stated many many times. Humans are social creatures. As @Isaac keeps pointing out, WE CREATE COMMUNITIES! It's what we do. Species that work together have a much better chance of survival compared to species who don't. The happiness/contentment/fulfillment level experienced by each individual human within a community is influenced by the actions of everyone in that community and natural happenstance outwith the control of the community and many many other influences such as individual personality/motivations/priorities. A complicated system called the human experience.
Yet even despite that complexity and the possibility of individual harms, more people still want to have children compared to the number that does not, based on the continuous population growth of our species. Looks like most humans choose to keep living after they have been born so who are the antinatalists to try to suggest they hold the moral high ground by suggesting that all parents are immoral?

It becomes clear how the antinatalist viewpoint allows them to excuse themselves from any responsibility for their maintenance of human suffrage due to their claim that it's okay to standby and watch. Perhaps they would add to the words on the American statue of liberty. 'Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses and we antinatalists will standby and watch them suffer.'
The antinatalists exclaim 'tut, tut these poor, tired, huddled masses are upsetting my sensitive persona. The only sensible decision is to help end all life in the Universe by asking all humans to stop reproducing. :halo:

It's even more fascinating to read antinatalism in its platitudinal mode. The old 'you can attract more flies with sugar than vinegar' approach. :roll:

Those who advocate non-interference cannot then argue against others choosing to reproduce and not be called a hypocrite.

I mean non-interference. So the choice would be not to do anything about a given situation. — Tzeentch

So you willingly leave yourself open to accusations of cowardice? Should the world have stood by and not interfered with the Nazi plans for all people they considered inferiors?

Inaction does not cause harm. It's a neutral state — Tzeentch

So you see an innocent getting attacked and you take no action? Inaction may not cause the harm but it can help maintain it. Just like no reproduction would cause the harm of making a species extinct!

This statement is obviously false! Are you saying antinatalists are a fringe, minority group? — Agent Smith

Yes I am. The fact that the human population of the Earth has been increasing since the days of the first Homo Sapiens is proof enough for me.

overpopulation — Agent Smith

How did that happen based on your suggestion of antinatalist populism?

Surely, the conversiom factor is not 1. What you're tryin' to say is that if, in your family, only your bro/sis is :sad: , it's absolutely ok. Wouldn't her sobbing drag down your entire family's happiness score? — Agent Smith

No I already told you before, I would be one of the people at a party who tries to cheer up anyone who looks like they are not enjoying themselves but I would not be the pessimist who would declare the party bollocks because of some sad people at the party. Maybe their dog just died, who knows. Your responsibility is to help them, if you can, not conclude that antinatalist BS has been exemplified as correct and it would be better if EVERYONE at your party had not been born because one or two or ten of them have faces that look :sad:

I hope that we will, as you mentioned, stand united—for the good of all. — DA671

I think we can safely say that you and I stand united in our opposition to antinatalists and we probably represent an overwhelming global majority. If humans do go extinct at some point in the future I think it will have little to do with the efforts of or noises from antinatalists.

But I'm also aware of the misery that exists.

My concern is specifically with the morality of the act of imposing life upon someone. — Tzeentch

And your solution to this concern; is to advocate for the extinction of your species through their global consent. is this correct? That's your solution?

I hope you understand that the harm that befalls people isn't always limited with "some bad", and now always followed up with good to enjoy — Tzeentch

Does life just scare you? Are you afraid of coming to harm? Do you spend your days afraid of all the bad things that might happen to you or those you care about?

There is a rather harsh Darwinian theory that those who do not or can no longer reproduce become less important to 'nature.' Almost like the old lion who gets 'overthrown' by the young lion who then takes over the pride. The old lion then wanders into the jungle and usually dies soon after. This speaks to the natural imperative of reproduction and survival of a species.
The antinatalists should be grateful that we are creatures who refuse to accept the old Darwinian 'law of the jungle.' But it is possible that their importance to 'nature' is reduced by their decision not to reproduce. I currently share this position with the antinatalists as I have no children. I have been content with this decision but the antinatalist viewpoint is one of the most compelling reasons I have heard to encourage me to make a newborn. Even at 58! :chin:

Preferably, I would like to see a world wherein we would not need the mat at all. Maybe it's a lofty goal, yet I think it's worth striving towards. — DA671

Absolutely! Perhaps we can also prevent the 'sacrificial lamb' type shortfalls or any 1 sufferer out of every 10. No people means 10 out of every 10 cannot ever be achieved. Let's keep trying for 10 out of 10 every time but lets never forget that life needs comparators to be able to understand and appreciate what 'good' is. We all need some bad in our lives to be able to enjoy the good. The antinatalists don't understand this it's beyond their ability to.

What matters to me is trying to do the right thing. The rest depends upon the wills of the other sentient beings. — DA671

UNITED, we stand!

I hope that the good in the world can be conserved to a degree that people would not have to turn towards the void. — DA671

I think the void you describe should now be awarded a new welcome mat with the words 'All antinatalists welcome here. Nonexistance available here, for all who apply, anytime!'

What happened in Sri Lanka is undoubtedly a good sign. More positive changes will probably occur as as their inner values drive them towards the greater good. — DA671

Hope springs eternal!!

That, of course, is the final destination. — DA671

And no formation of antinatalists will ever stop the inevitable movement of the human race towards a fairer global socio/political system. Remember what the Mahatma said! All tyrannical systems in history have fallen. Do the antinatalists really believe that the human race will vote for their own extinction?
That is their ultimate suggestion after all. I mean come on! How ridiculous can it get. It's embarrassing that we have to debate such utter tosh because they continue to make their white noise.
Pointless distractions from the real issues going on in the world today.
The people of Sri Lanka have just demonstrated that the nefarious cannot always depend on the police and the army to support them. The police and army are not always filled with mindless automatons, sometimes they support the people as they come from the people!

focus on reducing inequalities — DA671

:clap: and in reducing 'undeserved harms,' by employing better politics and by establishing powerful checks and balances which will prevent the nefarious from gaining power and positions of authority.

If I throw a party and I see someone :sad: , my party is bollocks! :snicker: — Agent Smith

Even if the vast majority at your party are having a great time?
The pessimist! A hundred joys just cant compete with a single :sad:
I am glad I don't think like that.

What do we do? — Agent Smith

Live, progress and continue the fight against viewpoints such as antinatalism and the narcissism of the very few.
Edit: Oh, I forgot to include 'and keep reproducing! Responsibly, of course.