quote
follow
|
19-02-2019 Btw, please also watch "Is Morality Objective" when you have time (if you have not already):https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwaVU-70z9s This guy describe himself as an antinalist, looks quite smart, and he is very correct, that antinatalism as a general philosophy can be only built on the idea of objective morality. IMO, antinatalism as a personal choice, is just fine, at least for me. However, he is right to seek more into this and want a proof, that this is not just something subjective, in our head. But the way he does it, is very similar to Kant - that moral exists in our reason, and in order to prevent self-contradiction, in order to be rational, sane, one must be also moral in an objective way. This is NOT the right materialistic way of thinking however, since you put being rational, being reasonable (which is just a side products of your brain), above the purely materialistic experience of your nervous system. I.e. natural beings are not rational, they are bound only by subjective experience. Suffering caused by reason, is very rarely achieved. Have you seen a cat playing with a dying mouse? Can the cat realize that it's causing even more pain to the mouse? I don't think so. It's very similar with small children, that do things and cause involuntary pain, without understanding it. You must teach the child that it's causing pain, and only then it realizes it and acts on it, i.e. becomes reasonable. The child may have idea about suffering of someone else, but without experience, that it can associate with this idea, it means nothing. And this is actually the really materialist way of thinking, to put experience first, and experience is always subjective, deprived from any kind of deeper objective meaning. I.e. the symbol, idea has no meaning/existence on it's own (contrary to Plato). So antinatalism, as a general philosophy, IMO is not possible without metaphysics. You don't need "god" for it, but you need to be first and foremost rational, which means - idealist, since physical nature is irrational. Anyway, hope this can create at least some work for you on this planet (besides of course trying to survive, for the surviving itself, which is the definition of irrationality)... and if you chose to dig deeper into your mind of course. I'm not claiming I understand what really all this means, I just know there is "something" in it. I know morality is based in the reason and the heart, and at some level, it all makes sense, although, this is not the level at which we exist. You can say this level is imaginary, but what if it's rational? How it will affect your own ability to believe in being rational? Is being rational, natural at all? What is more important - the brain or the mind? What would you choose if a discrepancy occurs? Do you believe you have the choice at all? Since the function of the brain is to keep you alive, to survive, but not to give you a reason to do it. Only your mind needs such reason. What it means, when the mind wants to destroy the body that gave it birth? Isn't this the greatest contradiction of this life... And who is right, and who is wrong - the body, or the mind? |
Comments to Nightly ramblings on life, suffering, death and dying (oh, goodie!) :P