{∅, {∅}, {∅, {∅}}} : Rage Against the Meat Grinder

I finished reading the paper, UTOPIC PESSIMISM: THE MESSIANIC UNDERPINNINGS OF THE ANTINATALIST POLEMIC (direct download link left in on page 1 of this thread) by Joshua Robinson Miller.

I was surprised at my reaction.  That is, I was initially a hostile reader, thinking he would be attacking authors I embraced; but he did not so much attack the pessimistic conclusions of these authors as he exposed the futility and lunacy of the Antinatalist Movement.   Holden has also already come to similar conclusions, if I'm not mistaken.

Well, much like Holden, this Joshua Robinson Miller concludes that we have no choice but to just accept this raw deal for what it is.  It is not within our power to change the nature of this world, the nature of the very kernel of Nature itself.

[  NOTE: In an admonition of humility, admonition  |----> gentle reproof  ]

His concluding statement:

For those who find themselves among the pessimistic few, stoicism may provide a way of living in the pessimistic void created by the vacation of meaning. Epictetus was born a slave but died a free beggar in the early Roman Empire. His Enchiridion or manual, provides advice to those who want to discover the secret to happiness in this world. His great work begins with an admonition of humility. “Of things some are in our power, others are not...If then you desire anything not in our power, you must be unfortunate (unhappy).”

If one acknowledges the conclusions of pessimistic philosophy, it is far better to accept the world as it is than militate against it in an imaginary hope. It matters not whether the hope is for the willing extinction of the human race or the transformation of human society into a universal brotherhood. Recognizing what is in our power and only desiring that which we are capable of controlling is far more conducive to happiness than attempting to remake the world according [to] our infinite desire for more justice and equality. If we accept the thinking of Schopenhauer and the pessimists who came after him, we are left with very minimal available reactions. We can be kind to our neighbors and coworkers. We can engage in friendly ways with our children. We can help to encourage the optimistic illusions of those around us rather than attempting to deconstruct worldviews which we are unable to replace. Essentially, pessimism reveals a world with a future that is not significantly different from its past. It is beyond our ability to change this world. We just have to decide whether and how we want to live in it.

I would not go so far as encouraging the optimistic illusions of those around us, but we might ease up on deconstructing worldviews which we are unable to replace.  I can't help but notice this suggestion is pretty much right from the horse's mouth, for Schopenhauer touches upon this in his "Religious Dialogue," a kind of back and forth in the tradition of Plato recounting Socrates.  The one admonishes to allow the masses their necessary illusions, for not all are able to handle raw animal existence without meaning, even if the meaning is derived from fiction.

Of course, one could use this conclusion to say we ought to also allow Antinatalists the option of believing that they might contribute to the desired extinction of the race by not reproducing.   Chances are, our species is just another big fat cancer which has convinced itself of some kind of "higher purpose."

In other words ... as per usual, this big mother iceberg we call existence, has really got us by the balls.   



The more things change, the more they stay the same.   New Boss, Old Boss, No Boss.

I have this feeling I am going to require some heavy drugs and hard liquor at intervals along the way through this thing we're calling human existence, to be honest, blunt, frank, if not even a bit rude and inappropriate.





We all know that crap is king.