So now Professor Greyroots has said that, basically, the whole scientific community is made up of liars and pedophiles, and that he is the smartest man in the world. Are any of you evilists getting it yet? Anybody? You can't all be this stupid, I just refuse to believe that.
Look, I get it. Y'all are into being humiliated and treated like shit. It makes your willies jerk. Like I've said before, I'll never understand the sado/masochism thing. To me it all seems based in some pretty creepy psychological gamesmanship. But is there no limit to which you will insult whatever intellects you have left in the service of some useless, ignorant hick just because he leaves belt buckle bumps on your behind? He has ANY authority on scientific subjects because WHY?
Take off your goddamned hair shirts and let some air in, you imbeciles! Or at least stop pretending you care about anything regarding truth, go search out his basement and suck him off already. Are you evilists really beyond redemption? Are you destined to dangle from the Prof's ass like the human dingleberries that you are for the rest of your miserable lives? God, I hope not.
On the other hand, there is no free will, everything that happens was always bound to happen, and Professor Greyroots is just as much a part of the grand scheme of things as anybody, I guess. It irks me to say so, but it's true. You see, we humans live in two different worlds, the world of material reality, and the false world that material reality is pretending to be right now on this planet. Oh, and the Professor's monistic ghost world, if you're willing to buy your recycled metaphysics from some clown who is in abject denial about pretty much anything he doesn't care for or uderstand.
However, it is also true that atoms are the constituent building-blocks of both wonderful souffles, and lumps of rancid monkey feces. Which do you prefer the taste of, evilists?
Yikes! I just realized that the answer for some of you might be number 2! shudder
10 comments:
It's just that I feel so embarrassed for you guys and gals, you evilists. You're willing to throw your minds out with the trash because your low self-esteem leaves you open to the machinations of this freak.
The professor and most of his loyal followers do not seem to grasp the is/ought problem.
It is shame that the AN debate was hijacked by people like this. There are many reasons not to have children that have little to do with the suffering one encounters in life. The "suffering sucks" crowd pretty much runs the show. Maybe I didn't want children because I think humans are a botched and diseased species. Mainstream AN is mostly made up of moral crusaders, radical leftists, and other naive, angsty types. I give a pass to the young ones, but I'm embarrassed for the many who are well into their 40's and beyond.
Kirk, indeed. Im very much saddened by what people are calling AN right now. Even I was attacked. Exactly what you said, tho I understand some angst, most of mainstream is this, "moral crusaders, radical leftists, and other naive, angsty types."
Well, suffering has been the leading motive for philanthropic antinatalism, as Benetar always put it. And that's been the main focus in the English speaking world at least, as far as I can see. Which is fine as far as it goes. But most certainly, it's going to attract the right-on crowd, what elements of them that tend towards pessimism at least (which is more than I think a lot of them would want to admit).
A lot of current ANs certainly seem to be coming from a vegan activist background. I suspect a lot of them are trying to take the whole negative utilitarian motivations of veganism to some kind of absolutist conclusion that suits their temperaments. Can't claim to have a speck of evidence for that, but I like to think other people have noticed the same thing. So, for them, "the suffering of others" is an important motivator.
So, if that's right, it's easy to see that whole contemporary cultural move towards moral-superiority-through-personal-choice-but-let's-turn-it-into-a-public-campaign-because-it's-the-done-thing-these-days turing AN into just such a campaign.
I agree with you, Andrew.
Vegans don't seem to realize the amount of suffering that would be inflicted on wild animals, if the world went completely vegan. They focus primarily on domesticated animals. I do like the idea of lab grown meat, and think that's the best solution if it's doable.
Obviously there is suffering in the world to varying degrees. When we say there is suffering in the world, we are describing one aspect of reality that sentient beings experience. That is doesn't necessarily lead to an ought. We can't get an objective value from a fact. It's a fact that humans have evolved to sometimes cooperate, and be compassionate/altruistic. Some would claim that because we evolved this ability, then we ought to always be compassionate/altruistic. But humans also evolved the ability to be aggressive and violent. I doubt many people would claim that because of that fact, that we ought to always be aggressive and violent.
I think Zapffe is far more convincing than Benatar. Benatar and mainstream AN seem to think there is nothing wrong with humans at all! They just suffer a lot, and therefore should stop breeding. Zapffe on the other hand makes it clear that humans are a broken critter that should not be. Maybe the admission that humans are FUCKED UP, is too much for even AN's to handle?
"Is there any man who still shuts his eyes to the plain fact that homo sapiens is but a primate, cousin of the gorilla, with a brain over-developed to think abominations, and a larynx evolved to aid their execution" Alister Crowley, The Vindication of Nietzsche.
Vegans in general, at least the mainstream variety, seem to operate on the assumption that if everyone just ate vegetables, everything would be ok in life. I find it funny how can they be right about a lot of things and also be wrong.
Post a Comment