Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
November 14, 2015 at 2:15 am (This post was last modified: November 14, 2015 at 2:18 am by Edwardo Piet.)
RaphielDrake Wrote:Alot of people will try to tell you that you just have to live.
They'll tell you about the joys of loved ones and family. How you can forge your own meaning. They'll use all sorts of flowery language to try and make your life seem like something beautiful and unique to be cherished. They'll tell you to "live life to the fullest", whatever the fuck that means.
I'm not going to do that. Thats all bullshit.
For most people life is pain, a thankless struggle. You are born screaming into this world and chances are you'll die the same way. Its inevitable. Heres the thing though; between those two points is a nexus of possibility. One of those possibilities is you, with tears in your eyes, taking a handful of pills and being some clean-up crews Tuesday night. They'll scoop up the remains with all the enthusiasm of someone who does this for a living, put you on a slab, determine the cause of death then with a weary, bored sigh dispose of whats left. I'm probably missing afew steps but thats basically the crux of it. Your lifeless remains being flushed down the toilet like the worlds most depressing goldfish.
Is that the best you can do? Is that seriously the best you can do? Is that really the best life and the best end you can picture for yourself? I'm really asking. If it is then you're the best judge. If it isn't then whats the deal? Not motivated? Not happy? Fine, then be angry, be active, be alive. Be whatever it takes to get in motion. Trying is living and living is trying.
Anything less is simply existing, you can be ignored and forgotten. You'll watch yourself decay day by day knowing that nothing you did had any impact at all. Every regret that drove you to that point will play over and over in your head until it dominates everything you are and everything you will ever be. And yes, eventually, you will die. Leaving behind nothing of worth.
Do not let that happen to you. Ever. Genes are not that unique but memes... memes can be. And their ripples can last an eternity, long past living memory.
You're either alive or you're dead, you're either living or you're not. Pick one now because that choice isn't there forever.
This is poetry. The text that lives behind these hide tags is one of the most beautifully true things I have ever read. Instant rep.
November 14, 2015 at 4:00 pm (This post was last modified: November 14, 2015 at 4:05 pm by prmptuscerus.)
Thanks so much for responses and for giving honest feedback instead of platitudes.
The post was made before ideation, but I wouldn't call it an attempt as I didn't actually perform any action. I speculate there are many people who would take their lives if there were options which weren't so confrontational.
An interesting point that I took from this thread was that simply because one individual desires to take their life doesn't necessitate that others need to assist. Not only do others have a right to make whatever claims they wish about your state, they have a right not to be associated with an action they might find disturbing. It is interesting to know that Switzerland allows euthanisia for tourists. I had done research on Belgium but realized it wasn't going to work for me.
Less important issues-
A few asked about agnosticism in my definiton. My definiton of agnosticism is very unpopular; I lack knowledge (or belief) about God. I do believe that atheism is the positive claim that God does not exist and I realize that is not popular amongst atheists. I respect the right of people to call themselves what they wish and I don't enjoy debating semantics (although the distinction does come up in debate for reasons you are all well aware of regarding burden of proof). I believe it is possible to disprove things; like the existence of a openly Islamic senator, although the stipulations regarding God make it much more problematic.
Regarding evolution, I would invite criticism of incorrect claims made about it. I made some claims without showing how I got there. I recognize evolution itself makes no moral claims or philosophic claims although an individual might derive some from evolution, but is just a theory of origins. (I suppose by virtue of being a theory of origins it would have to rule out other theories of origins like Creationism). If there is no value to human life, as the Mulsim poster described, which is objective then eugenics as I understand it would be totally valid. Why should the mentally ill pass on their genetics, or addictive personalities or those with limited mental capacity? I suppose the idea that these people should not live is in itself a value judgment and would be unfounded, but personally I find it valid and can thus only apply it to myself.
I contended that Hedonism (or whatever term you want to give it) would be the only reason to live and I find this to be most often the response. I like the feeling I get with family, I like video games, I like vegetable soup. I'm not judging it, I find it absolutely valid for an individual to make that distinction. I just don't understand it personally and I find it ridiculous from my perspective. Something else that I would take away from this thread is a new idea, that of legacy or accomplishment. One can accomplish something that is meaningful to pass down to other individuals which can enhance their lives. This perspective is much more fulfilling than what I perceive as pleasure seeking.
November 14, 2015 at 4:06 pm (This post was last modified: November 14, 2015 at 4:11 pm by robvalue.)
I'm very glad to hear you are still with us
One of the reasons I won't have children is that I don't want to create a child which will very likely have at least one of the serious health problems I have. I think it's a very unselfish and reasonable decision to come to, and I wish more people would do it. I couldn't bear the idea of my child going through half of what I have. There are plenty of other reasons I wouldn't have one either, but I wanted to agree with you that although some people have a "fuck it, I want a baby" attitude, putting as much thought as you have into it is admirable.
As for semantics, you seem to be using just different definitions to the general atheist community. What you call agnosticism we would call agnostic atheism; what you call atheism we would call strong atheism, which can still be agnostic; or gnostic atheism if knowledge is being claimed (this is relatively rare). I have much more about this on my website here. But you've no requirement to change your definitions, all that matters is knowing what each person means when they use words.
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
November 14, 2015 at 4:10 pm (This post was last modified: November 14, 2015 at 4:14 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
(November 14, 2015 at 4:00 pm)prmptuscerus Wrote: Regarding evolution, I would invite criticism of incorrect claims made about it. I made some claims without showing how I got there. I recognize evolution itself makes no moral claims or philosophic claims although an individual might derive some from evolution, but is just a theory of origins. (I suppose by virtue of being a theory of origins it would have to rule out other theories of origins like Creationism).
In the section below, it's almost as if you never wrote the section above......
Quote:If there is no value to human life, as the Mulsim poster described, which is objective then eugenics as I understand it would be totally valid. Why should the mentally ill pass on their genetics, or addictive personalities or those with limited mental capacity? I suppose the idea that these people should not live is in itself a value judgment and would be unfounded, but personally I find it valid and can thus only apply it to myself.
You "find" it valid, despite being unfounded? Why mental illness? Why shouldn't everyone without my specific eye color be prevented from passing on their genetics? No, no, better...why not everyone except me...because I'm clearly the pinnacle of human evolutionary development and despite that statement being entirely unfounded...I "find" it to be valid..........
You're being silly.
Personally, I live for legacy, achievement, good vegetable soup with my family, and crushing newbs in LOL. It's not a "pick one" question.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
November 15, 2015 at 2:53 am (This post was last modified: November 15, 2015 at 2:55 am by prmptuscerus.)
(November 14, 2015 at 4:10 pm)Rhythm Wrote:
(November 14, 2015 at 4:00 pm)prmptuscerus Wrote: Regarding evolution, I would invite criticism of incorrect claims made about it. I made some claims without showing how I got there. I recognize evolution itself makes no moral claims or philosophic claims although an individual might derive some from evolution, but is just a theory of origins. (I suppose by virtue of being a theory of origins it would have to rule out other theories of origins like Creationism).
In the section below, it's almost as if you never wrote the section above......
Quote:If there is no value to human life, as the Mulsim poster described, which is objective then eugenics as I understand it would be totally valid. Why should the mentally ill pass on their genetics, or addictive personalities or those with limited mental capacity? I suppose the idea that these people should not live is in itself a value judgment and would be unfounded, but personally I find it valid and can thus only apply it to myself.
You "find" it valid, despite being unfounded? Why mental illness? Why shouldn't everyone without my specific eye color be prevented from passing on their genetics? No, no, better...why not everyone except me...because I'm clearly the pinnacle of human evolutionary development and despite that statement being entirely unfounded...I "find" it to be valid..........
You're being silly.
Personally, I live for legacy, achievement, good vegetable soup with my family, and crushing newbs in LOL. It's not a "pick one" questio
Yes, I find. Allow me to unpack 'find'. If value is entirely subjective, then the only way any kind of value relevant to me which .. could exist would be if it originated from my own self; my own subjective opinion. If I deem subjectively, that is in a personal way which is not binding to any other individual but matters only to my self that people with degenerate traits, (people who would embody traits which we would consider less than healthy or that lead to profound suffering) should not reproduce, I would 'find' it that way.
If an individual 'finds' that suffering is valuable (in the suffering we come close to God, everything happens for a reason, etc.) than I can certainly understand a belief system which allows for reproductive rights for all. However, if one 'finds' that suffering is not necessary and is not valuable, then it could follow that perhaps those with traits which would lead to profound suffering should withhold their reproduction and should be encouraged to do so. Again, I say this as someone who would put myself in the category of one whose right to reproduce should not be allowed. Or, at least in my opinion, due to health issues and mental illness. I believe, subjectively, that these traits (mental illness, severe physical defects) are more important than things like eye color or hair color and to compare them is not make an adequate comparison. You can find otherwise
Lesser point, I never claimed one must have only one reason to live. May you find a hundred.
November 15, 2015 at 7:47 am (This post was last modified: November 15, 2015 at 7:58 am by Whateverist.)
My dear prmptuscerus,
You might find this amusing. For myself it colors how I conceptualize myself. I see you as identifying only with the 'left brain' as it is defined in this video.
Since you yourself bring up evolution, what if it turns out that the situation is as described here? Then, like most animals at all like ourselves, our consciousness is bifold in order to allow us to exercise peripheral vigilance even while attending narrowly to specific tasks consciously. I think we may be an extreme evolutionary experiment. In us -evolutionarily speaking- the delay between perception and instinctive reaction has been maximized to the point where we can be entirely unaware that there is anything more to us than our own ruminations. There is my personal subjectivity surrounding my deliberations - and nothing else. But that isn't actually true. It is only the extreme separation of consciousness which we embody which makes it seem so.
If this is at all true then it seems important to question what role your conscious deliberations should serve. Why is existentialism even on the table? The only redemption for the alienated conscious mind is to serve the organism from which it was split. Rather than seek your own satisfaction, seek instead the fulfillment of your total organism including the part with which you do not currently identify. The purpose in your creation was never to rule but rather to serve. Accept the demotion and you may yet find true meaning.
You can see how religion would facilitate wholeness, make it easier perhaps. But once you understand the issues, there shouldn't be any need for literal belief in anything supernatural. The complexity of the human mind is plenty mysterious, especially when you realize you do not consciously speak for the whole thing.
November 15, 2015 at 10:25 am (This post was last modified: November 15, 2015 at 10:59 am by Faith No More.)
(November 15, 2015 at 2:53 am)prmptuscerus Wrote: Yes, I find. Allow me to unpack 'find'. If value is entirely subjective, then the only way any kind of value relevant to me which .. could exist would be if it originated from my own self; my own subjective opinion. If I deem subjectively, that is in a personal way which is not binding to any other individual but matters only to my self that people with degenerate traits, (people who would embody traits which we would consider less than healthy or that lead to profound suffering) should not reproduce, I would 'find' it that way.
If an individual 'finds' that suffering is valuable (in the suffering we come close to God, everything happens for a reason, etc.) than I can certainly understand a belief system which allows for reproductive rights for all. However, if one 'finds' that suffering is not necessary and is not valuable, then it could follow that perhaps those with traits which would lead to profound suffering should withhold their reproduction and should be encouraged to do so. Again, I say this as someone who would put myself in the category of one whose right to reproduce should not be allowed. Or, at least in my opinion, due to health issues and mental illness. I believe, subjectively, that these traits (mental illness, severe physical defects) are more important than things like eye color or hair color and to compare them is not make an adequate comparison. You can find otherwise
Lesser point, I never claimed one must have only one reason to live. May you find a hundred.
One problem there is that neurological traits like depression are not solely due to genetics. Except maybe in rare cases, genetics can only predispose us to psychological issues, and it's actually our environment that determines the severity of those issues. If a person such as myself is worried about passing a trait like depression on, I'm not stuck simply refraining from reproducing. There are ways to minimze the effects, and I'm certain that given the right knoweldge, we could be capable of eliminating them all. The brain is a reactive organ, so we can help determine its development by controlling what it is exposed to.
That's evolution, though. We've evolved complex brains to manipulate our environment, which leads us to overcome certain issues. Perhaps even our next step in evolution is to overcome neurological issues altogether, and by not passing on your genes for our species to have more experience with those issues, you may be hindering us from taking that next step.
You're misapplying evolution as a whole, and it's actually quite hubris to claim to know what direction it is going. Unlike a non-existant god, evolution actually does work in mysterious ways. And hell, it's not called natural selection for no reason. By going and making your own decisions, you may be moving in the opposite direction as evolution needs to go.
