{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
9/9/2014 12:07:22 AM
6
-
Are you going to respond to my post in the other thread? Not pressing, just curious.
-
Editado por Verbatim: 9/9/2014 12:24:23 AMi'm not interested in the conversation of whether we are truly capable of preventing all suffering, thus making life worth it it's mostly speculative crap, the way i see it, so discussion will go nowhere. i'll elaborate, and you can reply, but i don't know if i really care to carry on the discussion and it's mostly out of fear for what a world with no suffering would be like—it's certainly not a feasible or realistic concept on its face. it's proposing to take away all conflict, one of the top perpetuators of suffering. no conflict means no difference of opinion, and if there's difference of opinion, then there's no debate. everyone's just sort of content and complacent and unconversational, even. life becomes pretty damn boring. i'd have to ask what the point would even be to impose life when life itself, especially at that point, has no purpose? or maybe there is a purpose, and I just don't see it. and i'm just saying, being in the unborn void is congruous to being in a perfect world with no suffering. in my opinion
-
[quote]and i'm just saying, being in the unborn void is congruous to being in a perfect world with no suffering. in my opinion[/quote]Well, I'm not arguing against that. I was simply saying that any "solutions" proposed by antinatalists aren't solutions at all. And I wasn't implying that we could create a universal utopia. Ending all suffering would likely require extinction of life, but we haven't the means to do it effectively yet. Anyway.
-
And what are those [i]obvious[/i] reasons?
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antinatalism
-
