{"product":{"product_id":"0199549265","title":"Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence","price":"36.95","image_url":"https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/41NnppUU0ZL._SL500_.jpg","url":"https://www.amazon.com/dp/0199549265"},"comments":[{"body":"You should check out the [Better not to have been](https://www.amazon.com/Better-Never-Have-Been-Existence/dp/0199549265) book. The general idea is that it is more beneficial to have never been born. But, suicide is so hard to accomplish - mentally and physically - that it might not be beneficial to kill yourself. \r\n\r\nBesides there are costs involved - say I'm 24, I have finally moved out from parents, live on my own. I have never been as free in my life before. All the childhood that sucked, the school are left behind. Im finally my own person. Health wise this is one of the highest point in one's life. From 30 it's going to go on downhill. Basically this and the next decade are going to be the best time of my life. Might as well make use of it if only to compensate for the shitty early part of my life. If/when it gets bad in my 40s+ I might just opt out of this game, and no family would be great in that regard - I would always be able to leave whenever I would want. \r\n\r\nLife is essentially about costs and benefits. Most people trudge on  because the pleasure shots they get out weight the suffering and the pain of suicide. It is true for me too (for now). But I would still prefer not to have existed. \r\n\r\n/r/antinatalism rules","subreddit_name":"collapse","author":"AwakenedToNightmare"},{"body":"You may be interested in reading some of David Benatar's works, namely [Better Never to Have Been](https://www.amazon.com/Better-Never-Have-Been-Existence/dp/0199549265).\r\n\r\nI sympathise with much of Benatar and Schopenhauer's writings, with the degrading climate and environment only reinforcing these beliefs. The only reason I remain a fence sitter is because I know I'm a hypocrite, as well as other philosophical and metaphysical beliefs.\r\n\r\nI do however advise you not to pay too much attention to the antinatalism subreddit unless you're well versed in filtering biases. It seems to be heavily populated with misanthropes, and in my opinion is a pretty shallow take on antinatalism as a philosophical idea.","subreddit_name":"Fencesitter","author":"Orangedale"},{"body":"You are indeed blessed, but you don't deserve an explanation from me with that bullshit sarcasm in your post.\r\n\r\nVisit /r/antinatalism and [do some reading](https://www.amazon.com/Better-Never-Have-Been-Existence/dp/0199549265) if you really want an explanation.  Spoiler alert: the book is way better than the subreddit.","subreddit_name":"starterpacks","author":"Stop_Breeding"},{"body":"this is exactly what [this book](https://www.amazon.fr/Better-Never-Have-Been-Existence/dp/0199549265) talks about, IDK I believe that life is meaningless and am pretty sure that it is NOT about happiness, even successful people may have a miserable life. and I remember J.Peterson saying that it's just a succession of hard choices and challenges that you face every day and that's all.","subreddit_name":"depression","author":"rayanbk"},{"body":"I'm an anti-natalist, i.e. I believe it's immoral to have kids. The brief rundown of why I believe this to be the case is basically just that, no matter what kind of life we live, we're inevitably going to suffer to some extent. We'll face emotional pains, physical pains, disease, injury, degregation, and eventually we'll die. If we aren't born, we don't experience any of those things, so that strikes me as a pretty clear positive. We do miss out on the good things in life, but since we aren't born, there is no mechanism by which we can regret missing out on these things, so that doesn't seem like a bad thing.\r\n\r\nNaysayers to this point of view tend to say either:\r\n\r\n1. If avoiding suffering is good, then missing out on pleasure is bad; or,\r\n\r\n2. If it isn't bad to miss out on pleasure because we don't regret it, then it isn't good to miss out on suffering because we don't appreciate it.\r\n\r\nHowever this symmetry isn't appropriate in my view. Avoiding suffering is just a flat out good, regardless of whether or not you appreciate it, and regardless of whether or not you're born. But missing out on pleasure is only bad if you actively regret it or feel bad about it. If you miss out on something you would have enjoyed but you don't care, then that's not really a bad thing.\r\n\r\nThat's basically a quick and dirty introduction to David Benatar's *[Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence](https://www.amazon.ca/Better-Never-Have-Been-Existence/dp/0199549265)*, which is what converted me to this way of thinking.\r\n\r\nAnd no, I don't want to kill myself.","subreddit_name":"AskReddit","author":"DarkMarxSoul"},{"body":"r/antinatalism took an interesting philosophy and used it as an excuse to call people “breeders” and say some pretty hateful shit about anyone having kids. The subreddit is fucked but the idea itself is an interesting perspective, I would recommend [this book](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Better-Never-Have-Been-Existence/dp/0199549265) if you're at all interested in this philosophy","subreddit_name":"shutthefuckup","author":"UltorMiner"},{"body":"\u0026gt; Can we say that antinatalism as a position is flawed or doesn't have any philosophical merit?\r\n\r\nBenetar's [Better Never to Have been](https://www.amazon.com/Better-Never-Have-Been-Existence/dp/0199549265) addresses one of the difficulties of advocating antinatalism in the Preface:\r\n\r\n\u0026gt; Many readers will be inclined to dismiss my arguments and will do so too hastily. When rejecting an unpopular view, it is extraordinarily easy to be overly confident in the force of one’s responses. **This is partly because there is less felt need to justify one’s views when one is defending an orthodoxy.** It is also partly because counter-responses from those critical of this orthodoxy, given their rarity, are harder to anticipate.\r\n\r\nAntinatism directly conflicts with orthodox beliefs with which we are raised, with which we are familiar, and which most folks use to justify their struggle of life.  The fact that antinatalism is counter-intuitive to most folks does not make the argument *bad*.  The fact that antinatalism is not conducive to selling Hallmark cards, or helpful in the quest to convince folks to produce more human capital stock, does not mean the position is inherently flawed.\r\n\r\nStatements can be true despite their making us sad.\r\n\r\nThat is a difficulty some folks cannot get past when assessing antinatalism.  They are so hung up on the practical issues that follow from antinatalism that they cannot clearly assess whether the arguments are internally consistent, or follow from true premises.\r\n\r\nOf course, the answer will depend on your rubric for discerning whether or not X has philosophical merit.","subreddit_name":"askphilosophy","author":"Quidfacis_"},{"body":"Read David Benatar's book: Better to never have been. Its one of the more popular antinatalist books. \r\n\r\n\r\nIn my opinion, all parents should read this book before deciding to have a child.\r\n\r\nhttps://www.amazon.com/Better-Never-Have-Been-Existence/dp/0199549265","subreddit_name":"askSingapore","author":"diamond_apache"},{"body":"I never understand why so many hunters say they don’t enjoy the “killing of the animal”. I enjoy the whole process, waking up early driving to a good location, I enjoy the pursuit, the camping, the killing, the gutting/cleaning and the eating. The argument you are using will always end in “why don’t you peruse photograph” or some other nonsense.\r\n\r\nAlso it’s impossible to argue with a vegan using Hedonism as a foundation. Veganism and Anti-Natalism are the logical conclusion of Hedonics. From a Hedonistic perspective not eating meat will always be more moral and cause less suffering than any form of meat eating, including hunting. But the very best thing that a vegan can do, as outlined in David Benatar’s book [Better Never To Have Been](https://www.amazon.co.uk/Better-Never-Have-Been-Existence/dp/0199549265/ref=asc_df_0199549265/?tag=googshopuk-21\u0026amp;linkCode=df0\u0026amp;hvadid=310872601819\u0026amp;hvpos=\u0026amp;hvnetw=g\u0026amp;hvrand=10454816658938036745\u0026amp;hvpone=\u0026amp;hvptwo=\u0026amp;hvqmt=\u0026amp;hvdev=m\u0026amp;hvdvcmdl=\u0026amp;hvlocint=\u0026amp;hvlocphy=1007177\u0026amp;hvtargid=pla-455380094866\u0026amp;psc=1\u0026amp;th=1\u0026amp;psc=1) is not bring new life into a universe of suffering; furthermore not having children is the best thing they can do to reduce the suffering of animals (fewer people to eat animal, encroach on wild spaces etc.) and for the environment. \r\n\r\nDon’t bother with Hedonics or making Hedonistic arguments, it’s a completely stupid principle.","subreddit_name":"AskUK","author":"Alpharatz1"},{"body":"\u0026gt; David Benatar may be the world’s most pessimistic philosopher. An “anti-natalist,” he believes that life is so bad, so painful, that human beings should stop having children for reasons of compassion. “While good people go to great lengths to spare their children from suffering, few of them seem to notice that the one (and only) guaranteed way to prevent all the suffering of their children is not to bring those children into existence in the first place,” he writes, in a 2006 book called “[Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming Into Existence](https://www.amazon.com/Better-Never-Have-Been-Existence/dp/0199549265).” In Benatar’s view, reproducing is intrinsically cruel and irresponsible—not just because a horrible fate can befall anyone, but because life itself is “permeated by badness.” In part for this reason, he thinks that the world would be a better place if sentient life disappeared altogether.  \r\n\u0026gt; [...] Undoubtedly, Benatar is a private person by nature. But his anonymity also serves a purpose: it prevents readers from psychologizing him and attributing his views to depression, trauma, or some other aspect of his personality. He wants his arguments to be confronted in themselves. “Sometimes people ask, ‘Do you have children?’ ” he told me later. (He speaks calmly and evenly, in a South African accent.) “And I say, ‘I don’t see why that’s relevant. If I do, I’m a hypocrite—but my arguments could still be right.’ ” When he told me that he’s had anti-natalist views since he was “very young,” I asked how young. “A child,” he said, after a pause. He smiled uncomfortably. This was exactly the kind of personal question he preferred not to answer.","subreddit_name":"TheMotte","author":"Ilforte"},{"body":"\u0026gt; your determination to catapult this question I had into a debate … Instead of hopping on to assume the worst about mothers who may have a question to ask another\r\n \r\nI don't want to catapult this into a debate. I was just interested in the answer to my question. And I don't know why you think I assume the worst, far from it. I'm just wondering why you'd not be interested in a dad's perspective on this question. I don't think it's similar to asking about \"how come I have erectile dysfunction?\" - and even so, there are plenty of female sexologists that have a 100x better answer than any random dude.\r\n \r\n\u0026gt; I do feel asking other mothers about their experiences was warranted due to the hormonal aspects involved\r\n \r\nThanks, I can get that, I guess that could make it more likely for women/moms while men/dads can have the same experience. And...you know, that answer was basically all I was wondering about. Other people have tried to turn this into a debate.\r\n \r\nHave you heard of David Benatar's \"[Better Never to Have Been: The Harm Of Coming Into Existence](https://www.amazon.com/Better-Never-Have-Been-Existence/dp/0199549265)\", I also found it after the fact. Perhaps you might find that interesting.","subreddit_name":"TooAfraidToAsk","author":"Leon_Art"},{"body":"Religion brings more bad than good, usually, so it's not something I'd rather use. Philosophy is another matter of course. For example /r/stoicism. It's not dogmatic the way religions are and is focused on reasoning rather than blind belief. Stoicism provides some meaning and frame for good living, but also accepts that suicide is an OK way out sometimes. \r\n\r\nBut it's just an imperfect solution to an unnecessary problem of life. The thing is, usually life is not meant living: [this book](https://www.amazon.com/Better-Never-Have-Been-Existence/dp/0199549265) provides nice arguments. Some lives of course are nice enough to even make up for all the sufferings, but how many? The world isn't made up of happy people, for the most part it's poor sick and oppressed struggling to survive. Even in 1st world countries. ","subreddit_name":"AskWomenOver30","author":"AwakenedToNightmare"},{"body":"\u0026gt; All women are whores? So that includes your mom?\r\n\r\nMore accurately, all post-feminist Western women. My mother's from the old country. Real gem of a woman who was a maiden when she met and married my father, has been a doting mother to me and my sister (and seems to have done an alright job of raising her daughter to be like her), and will grow into a pleasant old crone. My mother's a wonderful woman.\r\n\r\n\u0026gt; Men can be whores too, and you sound like one more than anyone I know. \r\n\r\nI wish women would pay me to have sex with them.\r\n\r\n\u0026gt; Do us a favor and don't procreate.\r\n\r\nActually had a vasectomy last year  (I'm an antinatalist who won't cause suffering - try reading David Benatar's *[Better Never to Have Been](https://smile.amazon.com/Better-Never-Have-Been-Existence/dp/0199549265/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8\u0026amp;qid=1474567401\u0026amp;sr=8-1\u0026amp;keywords=better+never+to+have+been)* for more). \r\n\r\nI'm surprised at your rhetoric, given that you're suicidal and damaged. Don't you wish you'd never been born? It would have been a favor to you if your hairless ape of a mother never spawned.","subreddit_name":"SanctionedSuicide","author":"[deleted]"},{"body":"\u0026gt;What a cunt. If he believes humans are such a burden why does he continue his own life. \r\n\r\nThere's actually many people who believe similarly to the position that man gives in his video. Anti-natalism is one such position. David benatar wrote a book you can see here: \r\n\r\nhttp://www.amazon.com/Better-Never-Have-Been-Existence/dp/0199549265\r\n\r\nI'm sure much of the books content is available online, if you actually wish to examine the positions of others. Likely college lectors on youtube about it too.\r\n\r\nThere's also movements and groups like the voluntary extinction group/project. Unsure of the exact name but you'll find them if you care to look it up. Many different ideas/philosophies some brutal others entirely non-violent however; they all share the one goal of ending the human race/life.\r\n\r\nWhile some fringe/oddballs may hold these beliefs without any real reason there also appears to be many especially in the world of philosophy who argue rather strongly for arguments much like the video puts forth. Arthur Schopenhauer is a notable example.","subreddit_name":"Futurology","author":"wd10000"},{"body":"If you want to research the different stances yourself, you can look up anti-natalism in general. Personally, I subscribe to David Benatar's idea (taken from summary of this [book] (http://smile.amazon.com/Better-Never-Have-Been-Existence/dp/0199549265/ref=smi_ge_rl_btns4_setch?_encoding=UTF8\u0026amp;%252AVersion%252A=1\u0026amp;%252Aentries%252A=0\u0026amp;%3Fie=UTF8\u0026amp;pldnNew=1)): \r\n\r\n\u0026gt;David Benatar argues that coming into existence is always a serious harm. Although the good things in one's life make one's life go better than it otherwise would have gone, one could not have been deprived by their absence if one had not existed. Those who never exist cannot be deprived. ","subreddit_name":"tifu","author":"GiantWindmill"}]}