Some lives have been more significant perhaps, than others, when it comes to legacy. That is of course an individual judgment call (which is where memorialisation can be most useful). This is what legacy means to me. — universeness

I see. OK.
Certainly, some individuals have been more significant than others on specific areas.
And indeed it matters --I give you credit for bringing up this subject-- because if these persons didn't make a difference and/or important contributions to society and the humanity, and didn't leave their important legacy to us, civilizations as we know them would not even existed. No science, no techology, no art ...
But it's not only important persons who leave a legacy. Everyone does. Everyone leave traces behind him as they walk on the path of their life. They can be little or very important for the lives of others. How many times haven't you remembered wise words from your father or other close relative meny years after they passed by? These words, can make a difference for you and others, if passed to them too.
I still remember wise words of an old poor man that I knew in my youth and still have an effect on me. This man, as millions or others, could not write books to transmit their wisdom to people. But words from mouth to mouth can have a similar effect as a book.

If legacy has no meaning to an individual human then, I personally can do no more and no less, than feel pity for such people.. Do you think such a 'pity' response is unwarranted or disrespectful? — universeness

Well, maybe. I personally wouldn't feel 'pity', or anything else for that matter.

That does not answer my 'yes' or 'no' question. Answering yes or no is quite possible as an overall judgment call, regardless of the nuances you wish to also consider. — universeness

Sorry about that.

you have employed two words/concepts in that sentence that currently, have zero demonstrable, objective evidence of any existent, that has such properties. — universeness

I find this somewhat disrespectful. However, I can let it be because I believe that you don't really mean it. I know that you respect other peoples' opinion and that you just reacted, as most people in here would. (BTW, these words/concepts mean a lot to a lot--if not most-- people on the planet.)

But it's not only important persons who leave a legacy. Everyone does. Everyone leave traces behind him as they walk on the path of their life. — Alkis Piskas

Absafragginlootly Alkis! and this is part of the reasons why, in my opinion, @rossii, antinatalists, nihilists, continuous pessimists, killjoys, etc, etc are soooooooo wrong-headed, regarding their general opinions about the futility of living the human experience, for each individual human involved.
We are the only species we know of, who can experience thought and self-awareness, at the level of complexity, width, and depth, we do.
I could be completely wrong about that, but where is the counter-evidence?

How many times haven't you remembered wise words from your father or other close relative meny years after they passed by? These words, can make a difference for you and others, if passed to them too. — Alkis Piskas

I agree.

I still remember wise words of an old poor man that I knew in my youth and still have an effect on me. This man, as millions or others, could not write books to transmit their wisdom to people. But words from mouth to mouth can have a similar effect as a book. — Alkis Piskas

I am sure you make effort to pass his wise words on to others, for their consideration. That act in itself, gives you an important purpose and adds to the meaning and significance of your own life. This speaks very well imo, for the importance of legacy to all humans, past, present and future.

I find this somewhat disrespectful. However, I can let it be because I believe that you don't really mean it. I know that you respect other peoples' opinion and that you just reacted, as most people in here would. (BTW, these words/concepts mean a lot to a lot--if not most-- people on the planet.) — Alkis Piskas

I do mean such words Alkis, as I assign a high personal credence level, to the possibility that they are true.
There is no compelling evidence that any existent in this universe is eternal (the only suggestion I give any significant credence to at all, is that the universe may be cyclical or it may oscillate, but even that would not be proof that it is eternal) and there is no evidence of a supernatural/esoteric/ethereal/transcendent existent (just to use a few terms that may be considered synonymous with 'spiritual.') If you are using the word 'spiritual' in terms of its original meaning of 'breathing' and 'animated/dynamic,' then I agree that all humans are spiritual, (as we are all dynamic and/or are breathing) under that original non-theistic, non-theosophist meaning.

It's almost impossible not to sound disrespectful to some folk's beliefs, if your own beliefs conflict with theirs.
I do respect the opinions of others Alkis, especially honest interlocutors like yourself, but to offer you diluted opinions, for fear of making you feel that an opinion you hold, is being disrespected, would diminish my ability to try to show that I am also an honest interlocutor.

I do respect the opinions of others Alkis, especially honest interlocutors like yourself, but to offer you diluted opinions, for fear of making you feel that an opinion you hold, is being disrespected, would diminish my ability to try to show that I am also an honest interlocutor. — universeness

Right. I'm aware of that and that's why I mentioned it. What I didn't mention, is that I also believe you have an open mind and you are willing to see other people's views.

And thank you for your kind words.

:up:

How awful is your own life compared to the above scenario? — Nils Loc

I don't know what your material situation is — Vera Mont

Well, the thing is, I should be having the time of my life. Compared to the lives of most people, mine would be an easier one. I have a job, enough money, friends, family, and am physically healthy...

But I struggle to see why suicide isn’t the most rational thing one can do. If there’s no 'objective meaning,' if there’s no 'afterlife,' why endure life? Why postpone death? Even if my life was filled with endless joy until the end, why go on?

I guess I don’t have a compelling reason for myself that would work and make me believe that extending my life for as long as possible is worth it.

If there’s no 'objective meaning,' if there’s no 'afterlife,' why endure life? — rossii

Why not? If all you do is endure life (a rather whiny thing for someone in the conditions you describe to say), then maybe you are just a waste of oxygen, after all. But causing grief and loss and guilt to your family and friends is reprehensible. If you're planning to end your life for lack of some abstruse idea, you should at least discharge all obligations, make all required provisions and detach from all personal ties.
Having done that, consider again. Sometimes new-found freedom provides a reason for living.

Why not? If all you do is endure life (a rather whiny thing for someone in the conditions you describe to say), then maybe you are just a waste of oxygen, after all. But causing grief and loss and guilt to your family and friends is reprehensible. If you're planning to end your life for lack of some abstruse idea, you should at least discharge all obligations, make all required provisions and detach from all personal ties.
Having done that, consider again. Sometimes new-found freedom provides a reason for living. — Vera Mont

The only reason I am alive now is that I don't want to hurt people around me. However, my mind keeps telling me there is no rational reason to live. I wake up in the morning, and all through the day, I feel that by living, I am doing an irrational thing. It's as if only the programmed survival drive is keeping me alive, but the whole day feels like a living hell, and the only thing bringing some peace is sleep. The articles about the rationality of suicide I posted in my response are constantly on my mind, and I can't seem to find any rational reason to stay alive.

I can't seem to find any rational reason to stay alive. — rossii

You might benefit from a change in lifestyle. Volunteer to do something for people or animals who don't need a rational explanation for wanting to live, wanting to feel well. Or maybe in a hospice for people who are dying in spite of their best efforts not to. There is no Purpose Fairy flying around at night, dispensing reasons to live. You have to find your own.

:up:

I can't seem to find any rational reason to stay alive. — rossii

Life and the process of living isn't rational.

There is no Purpose Fairy flying around at night, dispensing reasons to live. You have to find your own. — Vera Mont

:up:

Try to come to grips with existentialism. There must be something that gives you pleasure. Discover paths that lead from that activity, even if it is an activity hardly worth mentioning to others. Use your imagination to illuminate and create value with obscure discoveries. What is tiny can become big.

Thank you all for your replies and advice. I'm sure some of you find these posts tiresome, maybe some of the members think this is trolling (which it is not).

As time goes by, I've tried - tried to find some sort of "meaning" in this existence. To at least find a reason to go on (whether rational or irrational - or just whatever reason would work for me). However every argument I have leads towards suicide, and I can't find at least one solid argument to stay alive - as a materialist, pessimist, antinatalist...

The work of Jiwoon Hwang which I posted earlier, keeps occupying my mind - is he right? Is it always better to cease to exist?

https://unherd.com/2023/04/we-need-to-talk-about-extreme-antinatalism/

Excerpt from the above linked article:

... Jiwoon Hwang, Rafe McGregor, and Ema Sullivan-Bissett have all persuasively argued that promortalism is the core of antinatalism. ... For all three individuals, if you accept that life is suffering, it is reasonable not only to want to cease the propagation of life but to end life. Sullivan-Bissett and McGregor offer the analogy of smoking — if you think smoking causes harm, you don’t only think people shouldn’t start smoking. You believe that people should stop if they already smoke ...

So is there really no reason for an antinatalist to live?

There must be something that gives you pleasure. — jgill

Sure, there are many things....but with sour taste of total meaninglessness and the thought that whatever I do is pointless - because staying alive is irrational.

But now I see what they mean when they say ignorance is bliss.

But now I see what they mean when they say ignorance is bliss. — rossii

Then I am grateful for my ignorance. Or my ability to compromise - whatever.
I wish you could get over your impossible demands on life - it has so much good to offer those who accept it as it is, rather than as they imagine it should be.

So is there really no reason for an antinatalist to live? — rossii

Why don't you answer him @schopenhauer1?
Or again I prod my friend @Existential Hope, perhaps he is the better prospect for trying to help to bring rossil a little further out of his fogged and blocked thinking.
My own attempts in this thread seem to have been useless.

Why don't you answer him schopenhauer1? — universeness

He did respond in the other thread about antinatalism:

It is not worth the bother of killing yourself, since you always kill yourself too late.
— Cioran

Meaning, suicide is an impossible wish of undoing the suffering that has already occurred. What we really want is to never have suffered in the first place. Annihilation after the fact doesn’t negate this. — schopenhauer1

And actually, that's how I live, or at least I've tried to achieve this mindstate. I'm already born and cannot change that fact. Also, I don't want to increase the amount of suffering (to my family, friends...) - so suicide, whether or not you're an antinanalist, is (should be?) morally wrong.

Next thing I come across an article posted in my previous post where antinatalist and 2 non-antinatalists come to the conclusion that if you see life as suffering and are an antinatalist, it is reasonable to end life.

So I'm back to my confusion about suicide.

So I'm back to my confusion about suicide. — rossii

It comes down to suffering, doesn't it? Are you really? How much? Is there really nothing you could change to reduce your suffering? Have you explored all the options? If your suffering is unbearable, death is a reasonable choice. If you have alternatives, it's not.

Fair enough. Sounds like your main battle is between you and yourself. Good luck, I hope you survive.

:up:

Is there really nothing you could change to reduce your suffering? Have you explored all the options? — Vera Mont

I don’t really know. I’ve tried CBT with and without meds (like 10 different meds so far), I’ve seen a total of 5 psychologists and now with a 3rd psychiatrist. I’ve spent endless time discussing my problems with my close family - they said that they don’t understand how I can think this way, and repeating my problems seems to annoy a lot of them.

I (guess and hope) that people who don’t suffer, don’t want to die.

I just can’t get over these ideas and opinions posted by the above mentioned authors. You don't like suffering - well then, die. It's like even when you somewhat enjoy life, but are a pessimist, the only rational thing even then is suicide. I don't know, sounds f-ed up.

And I lack some sort of reason or motivation to endure the suffering.

s there really nothing you could change to reduce your suffering? Have you explored all the options? — Vera Mont


I don’t really know. I’ve tried CBT with and without meds (like 10 different meds so far), I’ve seen a total of 5 psychologists and now with a 3rd psychiatrist. I’ve spent endless time discussing my problems with my close family — rossii

No, I mean is there nothing you can actually do? Just asking for help and rejecting it won't get you very far. You need to get off your ass and go out of your way to be useful. Find a flood or earthquake from which you can rescue people; find a foodbank or animal shelter where you can help somebody and stop gazing into your own bottomless belly-button.

Absafragginlootly!!! Wise up rossii!

A long time ago a good friend of mine, a young man at the time, inhabited a world that was falling apart - or so he perceived it. He had no job, despite an advanced degree in the sciences, his wife threatened to leave him and take their two small children. He was at wits end.

His wife, a devout Christian, insisted on him joining her father's church (her father was pastor), or she would leave. He gritted his teeth and joined the church - and focused on acquiring the "belief" upon which the church was founded. In other words, he told himself, "You will believe what they believe".

Some would say, You can't believe something you don't believe down deep - it will always be a superficial belief. But my friend would prove them wrong.

He not only came to strongly believe the faith, he became a missionary, working with prison inmates along the Gold Coast of Africa. He spoke with President Reagan about his work.

Now, here is the truly odd part of the story. His church was protestant, and my friend wrote published articles about the dangers of Catholicism. Then, one day, he and his wife and family converted to the Catholic faith, and he became a Deacon of the Church, working with the homeless.

If you make up your mind to believe, it's not an impossibility. And it's a possible way out of your dilemma.

Now, here is the truly odd part of the story. His church was protestant, and my friend wrote published articles about the dangers of Catholicism. Then, one day, he and his wife and family converted to the Catholic faith, and he became a Deacon of the Church, working with the homeless. — jgill

If this is true, all he did was change the label on his good works. It's the same god, the same basic belief, with slightly different by-laws.

If this is true, all he did was change the label on his good works. It's the same god, the same basic belief, with slightly different by-laws. — Vera Mont

As much as I can recall this is a true story, perhaps inaccurate where my memory fails. He and I were bouldering companions while I got my doctorate and he got his masters at the same institution. We would go climbing together two or three times a week around 1970. At least at that time there were some real differences between the religions. However, the Catholic Church has moderated a bit over the intervening years.

I haven't talked with him in years. But I see EWTN has a fairly recent hour long interview with him and his wife. They were Pentecostals before Catholics, I see. He worked with a Watergate conspirator turned preacher at some point.

I would be interested in your response, if I respectfully compared the story of your friend to the well known 'Stockholm syndrome.' Would you find that an insulting and wholly unfair comparison. I expect your friend would.

If it is an option, join the military.

I don't see the Syndrome in play here. Once he began going to religious meetings with his wife a new personality began to evolve. He was welcomed into that community with open arms. He found a path that became more attractive the longer he followed it.

Sometime later he told me, "I used to worry so much about so many things and my life was meaningless, but now when a problem arises I put myself in God's Hands and let him guide me."

My mind keeps convincing me that the most rational thing one can do is, in fact, commit suicide. — rossii

Stop reading the philosophical shit that pulls you in this direction. Take up a physical challenge, like hiking or climbing.

If it is an option, join the military. — Lionino

The psych test might be a problem. But otherwise the military does provide a kind of meaningfulness.

The psych test might be a problem. But otherwise the military does provide a kind of meaningfulness. — jgill

Being 40 years would already disqualify a person in most of the world's military, but I imagine that something of that vein, even if not the military exactly, might be helpful. Perhaps the Air force is more tolerating.

Coast Guard.

Being 40 years would already disqualify a person in most of the world's military — Lionino

We were talking about rossii, and I don't know his age. Did I miss something?

Sometime later he told me, "I used to worry so much about so many things and my life was meaningless, but now when a problem arises I put myself in God's Hands and let him guide me." — jgill

I remain conflicted regarding this. I would feel really bad if I took away or really compromised the main support someone has in their life, that has became essential to them for their very sanity. Is it fair to ever compare such with a junkie and their drug supply? You know it's bad for them but they are addicted to it. Breaking that addiction can often mean hell to pay, but a better life, eventually, if they survive the change. Deconstructed theists often state how much better their life is since they abandoned their faith.
I see @rossii as someone who has become addicted to pessimism and cannot break free at the moment. So there are comparables here imo.

As I have stated before, I very much agree with Carl Sagan's "better the hard truth, I say, than the comforting fantasy." But still it can be a tough call to challenge the veracity of the beliefs of a theist, when that theist is one who is by any normal measure of such, an otherwise, really nice person who does all they can to help others when they are able to.
I will go at horrors like Ken Ham, Kent Hovind, Ray Comfort, William Lane Craig and many other well established bullshitters, (and their copycat clones/drones,) with everything I can muster, but yeah, it's a lot tougher when it's otherwise good people in your sights. I tend to be far far more gentle in my approach, if indeed I decide to make any negative comment at all about their theism.