Which is better, being born or never being born?!

deleriumtremens

I put this question to ye, humble AH-zers!!

Karoma

"Never being born". Definitely. I regret your being born. Thanks for asking.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

I am way too pissed for this kinda crap!

deleriumtremens

Karoma wrote: »

"Never being born". Definitely. I regret your being born. Thanks for asking.

Thats a bit harsh quite frankly. I'm only asking a question. Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit by the way, although I'm sure you know that seeing that you're so smart.

4zn76tysfajdxp

deleriumtremens wrote: »

Thats a bit harsh quite frankly. I'm only asking a question. Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit by the way, although I'm sure you know that seeing that you're so smart.

Dude, that's a cmod. Abort, abort.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

deleriumtremens wrote: »

Thats a bit harsh quite frankly. I'm only asking a question. Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit by the way, although I'm sure you know that seeing that you're so smart.

That's him, not you - don't take it personally.

Agamemnon

Cheer up OP, FFS. It's Christmas, drink more.

Here's a funny picture to raise your spirits.

Karoma

deleriumtremens wrote: »

Thats a bit harsh quite frankly. I'm only asking a question. Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit by the way, although I'm sure you know that seeing that you're so smart.

Perhaps you should have phrased your question better?
It was light-hearted. I'm sorry I hurt your feelings.

Poo 2: Grudge much? Don't drag the thread off topic any further.

deleriumtremens

Agamemnon wrote: »

Cheer up OP, FFS. It's Christmas, drink more.

Here's a funny picture to raise your spirits.

Poor fella!!!

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Karoma wrote: »

Perhaps you should have phrased your question better?
It was light-hearted. I'm sorry I hurt your feelings.

Poo 2: Grudge much? Don't drag the thread off topic any further.

Yes. It's all I ever think about. And it's nothing personal.... just observational...

Senna

Fight, Fight, Fi.... ah feck it

deleriumtremens

Karoma wrote: »

It was light-hearted. I'm sorry I hurt your feelings.

I accept you're apology.


However, I should say that I was only shlagggin' ya!!

The_Minister

If I had never been born, I would never have had the privilage of answering this question.

So I suppose, even if I don't enjoy life as much as many other people, I'm still glad that I was born.

AlmightyCushion

deleriumtremens wrote: »

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit by the way

Why of course it is.

[/sarcasm]

deleriumtremens

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

Why of course it is.

[/sarcasm]

Not very sarcastic, are you Mr. Cushion?

(Yes, I am a ****ing retard)

AlmightyCushion

deleriumtremens wrote: »

Not very sarcastic, are you Mr. Cushion?

(Yes, I am a ****ing retard)

Meh, hungover. It was the best I could muster.

Sharpshooter

If I'd never been born , I wouldn't be posting in your thread.
/ Afterthought , Terry probably wishes the above.

But I was born , and have gone through a life of misery , but I don't let it affect me anymore.

I guess it's a toss up .

Galvasean

How about 'born again' :pac:

themadchef

I don't know if the chicken or the egg came first, so this is way too deep for me.

deleriumtremens

Galvasean wrote: »

How about 'born again' :pac:

Ngohhhh, why I oughta!!

Sharpshooter

themadchef wrote: »

I don't know if the chicken or the egg came first, so this is way too deep for me.

Had to be the egg , the chicken had to evolve from something , right?


Ill go away now.

deleriumtremens

themadchef wrote: »

I don't know if the chicken or the egg came first, so this is way too deep for me.

Self replicating RNA molecules..later DNA molecules..later indirectly coding for cells..eventually and gradually sex cells...egg cells eventually evolve to be inside the ancestors of the chickens for various reasons, all the while the chickens' ancestors are evolving to what we now know as chickens..

...I think you could say it was the egg, but it wasnt an egg as we know it. But then again, classification of species isnt correct....it was still the egg though

Hogzy

I think my head just exploded...

Simi

sharpshooterH wrote: »

Had to be the egg , the chicken had to evolve from something , right?


Ill go away now.

Dinosaurs laid eggs so, eggs evolved first.

If your talking specifically about chicken eggs, then again, the egg evolved first.

The species that laid the egg that gave birth to the first chicken wasn't quite yet what we would call a chicken.

Local-womanizer

deleriumtremens wrote: »

Self replicating RNA molecules..later DNA molecules..later indirectly coding for cells..eventually and gradually sex cells...egg cells eventually evolve to be inside the ancestors of the chickens for various reasons, all the while the chickens' ancestors are evolving to what we now know as chickens..

...I think you could say it was the egg, but it wasnt an egg as we know it. But then again, classification of species isnt correct....it was still the egg though

Eggs are a chickens period,I never eat eggs.........

deleriumtremens

Right, this thread has just turned into a "which came first, the chicken or the egg" type thread!!

Why does everybody in here assume that existence is always preferably over non existance?!! Face it, the only reason you's don want to die is because its the most frightening thing in the world to yous...the reason for that being that the strongest desire any evolved organism should have is a desire not to die...the reason, in turn, for that being obviously that the genes that coded for a nervous system that made an organism feel less repulsed at the idea of dying would never get passed on in favour of the genes that made an organism not want to die. You's are all stuck with the desire to exist because evolution programmed youser brains like that. I hopw you're happy.:P

RoMiLe

Neither, it doesn't make a real difference either way.

RoMiLe

deleriumtremens wrote: »

the reason for that being that the strongest desire any evolved organism should have is a desire not to die...

I know what you mean but you should have said: Even when people desire death more than anything(which human beings are quite capable of), it can be extremely hard to overcome the instinct of self preservation.

Sharpshooter

deleriumtremens wrote: »

Right, this thread has just turned into a "which came first, the chicken or the egg" type thread!!

Why does everybody in here assume that existence is always preferably over non existance?!! reason you's don want to die is because its the most Face it, the only frightening thing in the world to yous...the reason for that being that the strongest desire any evolved organism should have is a desire not to die...the reason, in turn, for that being obviously that the genes that coded for a nervous system that made an organism feel less repulsed at the idea of dying would never get passed on in favour of the genes that made an organism not want to die. You's are all stuck with the desire to exist because evolution programmed youser brains like that. I hopw you're happy.:P

We are the only living beings that are forewarned that we will at some stage in our lives Die.

IE , we are the only living beings on the planet that know we will die at some stage.

We don't desire to exist , we exist to desire , all the good things that we think life has to offer.

It is what puts us above the animals , they live.

We exist.

/ told you I was crap at this seriousness business.
/normal punctuation will resume shortly.

RoMiLe

sharpshooterH wrote: »

We don't desire to exist , we exist to desire , all the good things that we think life has to offer.

It is what puts us above the animals , they live.

We exist.

I can't even begin to tell you how many things were wrong with this comment. And no, I'm not talking about your punctuation.

Sharpshooter

RoMiLe wrote: »

I can't even begin to tell you how many things were wrong with this comment. And no, I'm not talking about your punctuation.

OK , we exist knowing full well at some stage , we will also die.

Animals just live.
Then they die , but they have no concept of the meaning of death.:)

RoMiLe

sharpshooterH wrote: »

OK , we exist knowing full well at some stage , we will also die.

Animals just live.
Then they die , but they have no concept of the meaning of death.:)

Now that makes alot more sense.

Very true statement.

What's so unique about humans is that we can overcome our most basic instinct (self-preservation). And, as you said, animals cannot. They are 100% driven by instinct.

The_Minister

So, in summary....







..the OP is a rather unimaginative emo.

RoMiLe

The_Minister wrote: »

So, in summary....







..the OP is a rather unimaginative emo.

What an incredibly ignorant generalisation.

And also, kudos to a very constructive contribution to this thread.

Just because someone thinks about 'taboo' subjects you flame them? What a great society we live in.

I expected more from a moderator.

deleriumtremens

RoMiLe wrote: »

What an incredibly ignorant generalisation.

And also, kudos to a very constructive contribution to this thread.

Just because someone thinks about 'taboo' subjects you flame them? What a great society we live in.

I expected more from a moderator.

Yeah. I'm not an emo, far from it. I have a world view that I hold to be completely true but anytime I give anybody a hint as to what it entails, they slate me as being " a dpressing bastard" or something similar, just because they dont want to even fathom that what I am saying could be true. You dont need to be some whiney, face painted and angsty teenager to ask a question like I asked. Moderators, lose that arrogance and prejuding attitudes.

phenomenon

RoMiLe wrote: »

What an incredibly ignorant generalisation.

And also, kudos to a very constructive contribution to this thread.

Just because someone thinks about 'taboo' subjects you flame them? What a great society we live in.

I expected more from a moderator.

+1. The mods are always complaining that AH is descending into a brash tabloid "who's the funniest lolz" type forum, yet when someone makes an intelligent post that they can't counter for whatever reason (lack of understanding?) they resort to childish internet humour.

Back on topic. It all comes down to genes. Genes have an inherent "desire" to exist (but of course they are not individually conscience) and reproduce. We humans/animals are mere protein machines or hosts to our genes and so are programmed by our genes to "want to exist".

*turns and looks at camera, brushing hair to the side*
This isn't emo drivel - this is science

The_Minister

Moderators are only moderators in the forums that they mod.

One of the first things that you will learn about boards.


And, OP, do you not think that being born at least gives you the choice to kill yourself, whereas not being born, you just never exist?

RoMiLe

deleriumtremens wrote: »

Yeah. I'm not an emo, far from it. I have a world view that I hold to be completely true but anytime I give anybody a hint as to what it entails, they slate me as being " a dpressing bastard" or something similar, just because they dont want to even fathom that what I am saying could be true. You dont need to be some whiney, face painted and angsty teenager to ask a question like I asked. Moderators, lose that arrogance and prejuding attitudes.

Don't mind them. The majority of people don't have the mental capacity or are too afraid to think about things. Either that, or most people do and are too afraid to bring the subject up with others for fear of being scorned or 'different'. People say it's 'morbid' to talk about death. What I think is morbid is that our society hasn't evolved past this medieval form of thinking where death is looked upon as an inherently bad thing.

The majority are idiots to be quite honest. But don't let them stop you from speaking up. And don't let them make you bitter.

And whatever you do, don't EVER let their ill-informed opinions influence yours.

cHaTbOx

This thread can be summed up by this short video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rpKqMC2YfwI

RoMiLe

random chatbox wrote: »

This thread can be summed up by this short video

Haha that was quite funny! Some of the songs they wrote are really good.

But the 'chicken or egg' argument actually has nothing got to do with the original post. People went off track somewhere.

deleriumtremens

The_Minister wrote: »

And, OP, do you not think that being born at least gives you the choice to kill yourself, whereas not being born, you just never exist?

Yes. So this give us two options.

1) We are born against our will...there is a chance we will grow up to think that life is brilliant and there is a chance we will grow to think life is, all things considered, not worth living. Whichever perspective on things we end up taking arises as a result of factors outside our control (genes, upbringing, deterministic brain-state, our general "lot in life"). So, by our parents having us, they are taking a (pseudo)random gamble as to whether or not their child will grow up to believe that, all things considered, being born is worth it. In my opinion, that gamble is not worth taking and I believe we should act as ratioanl human beings and not have children (by doing this we also avoid condeming our potential children to a poor quality of life should a congenital disease etc develop).

2)We are not born..we avoid completely all of the above. Just as I wasnt around living a miserable existence during, say, the great famine, so, if I was never born, would I ever have to confront anything bad (although probably not as bad as the great famine) that may happen in my life. (Some peoples lives may be so good, however, that they think without doubt that being born is preferable)


I pick option 2. Thats just my opinion. But seeing that I'm here (against my will, obviously!!) , I intend to make the most of it!

craiginireland

deleriumtremens wrote: »

I put this question to ye, humble AH-zers!!

That would be an ecumenical matter

AckwelFoley

Without being born, one is not in a position to make comparsion.