Is Ligotti right or is it just incel rage?

Is Ligotti right or is it just incel rage?

Attached: The_Conspiracy_Against_the_Human_Race.jpg (257x386, 27K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=A8x73UW8Hjk
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Ligotti is an example of a writer who attempted to write literature as philosophy, not as a science fiction series. As an experiment, he tried to create a book that would be both about philosophy and about science fiction. (And maybe an anthology too). It would have been called "The Conspiracy Against the Human Race." The premise of the book? A book by a man with no philosophy of science, a philosopher whose views on the subject are utterly antithetical to the prevailing theories of science, an author who rejects philosophy in general, and an attempt to build a book about it that rejects philosophy also. Some charity is required since he is not a philosopher, so this is not quite so much the same as this is the same as saying it is impossible for someone to be a genius in philosophy.

can a case be made that in order for humanity to go somewhere you have to engage in non-human/anti-human activities?
for a fish to walk on land it has to become less fish
for humanity to evolve you have to become something other than human

Both are correct

>Some charity is required since he is not a philosopher, so this is not quite so much the same as this is the same as saying it is impossible for someone to be a genius in philosophy.
What the fuck this mean

None of those are fixed forms but are places on a spectrum; they only appear fixed because we reify them through language and scientific categories. So what does it mean for a human to become less human?

what even is it? Some type of lame Rust Cohle "human consciousness was a mistake?"

Don't judge him like he's attempting philosophy, its just a bit of fun

I think what he's trying to say is that since Ligotti is not a philosopher you should not apply to his work the same critical weight due a proper work of philosophy, but rather read it as a work of philosophical literature, more broadly considered.

they drew inspiration from ligotti in writing that character pleb

And Ligotti got it from Zapffe.

youtube.com/watch?v=A8x73UW8Hjk
direct quotes from the book

Ligotti isn't a misogynist and he doesn't give a shit about sex. He thinks existence is pure suffering because he's severely mentally ill. He has depression, chronic anxiety, and anhedonia. Anhedonia prevents the brain from experiencing pleasure.

he is an incel

He really isn't. Incel refers to misogynistic virgins who are totally obsessed with sex; it isn't supposed to be a generic insult.

Why is he so fucked looking

Attached: ligotti.jpg (299x168, 9K)

>Ligotti's ancestry is three-quarters Sicilian, one-quarter Polish
There's your answer.

Attached: thomas ligotti.jpg (186x266, 18K)

you are incorrect

of course he is right its very obvious. the problem is that most humans cannot understand that they are extremely biased towards life because thats the only thing they know. retards build all these elaborate metaphysical/moral/religious systems just to cope with life and get muh destiny and "im so special"-feels.

nature is nihilistic but humans have evolved to cope with it through delusions

Attached: 1368093219555.jpg (562x572, 61K)

Zapffe, Cioran, Schopenhauer, Mainlander, Zen buddhism, etc. Yeah he's not inventing anything new but giving his own sumation of this broad subject

This isn't him dipshit, just some clown who kinda resembles him.

This is why whites (Poles) and people of color (Sicilians) should not race-mix.

Mixed-race people are never good looking.

I think that's how I approached this as well and subsequently enjoyed it much more. I find Ligotti quite cozy to read.

This book's argumentation is flawed in that it's like every conspiracy theorist ever - every piece of evidence you bring against it reflexively 'proves it right'

Also, there's no objective evidence for either side of this debate. It's existence is pointless

That's Nietzsche basically

Incel is a slur like nigger. Lonely virgins starved of love and affection vent about their problems to eachother. They use "incel" as a shorthand term amongst themselves. But its their word, calling a sexually inexperienced person an incel is equivalent to calling a black person nigger.

Tjats my take as an outsider at least i have like 10 gfs irl

Ligotti is profoundly right about everything

>Is Ligotti right or is it just incel rage?
Yes

Lol you couldn’t be more wrong.

Faggot detected

You type like a slav, aka the niggers of white people.

Then I guess you still have a nigger as your leader.

(((Catholics))) are all one race.

I honestly bet he has had actual sex.

He just was unable to enjoy it.

Dude did go to college and played guitar in the 70’s.

It made me realize that the ontology of pessimism is pretty much irrefutable but it falls apart when it moves onto the justifications for antinatalism and the implication that only human consciousness not all existence as such is a hiccup and implies that it was a "mistake" rather than just something that happens

>the justifications for antinatalism
I don't think antinatalism is anything more than a personal value position, not a moral law or some such nonsense.
>and the implication that only human consciousness not all existence as such is a hiccup and implies that it was a "mistake" rather than just something that happens
I think this "mistake" language is not being used as precisely as you are implying. It's a "mistake" in the sense that it is harmful to us rather than being a pure evolutionary benefit. It's a rhetorical use of the term not meant to imply that there would otherwise be a correct purpose.

>that only human consciousness not all existence as such
Also I think that antinatalists are sympathetic to the suffering caused by consciousness in animals as well; it's not particular to humans, but humans are the only creatures capable of making a reasoned decision not to procreate.

Antinatalism is just a game: normal people with children convincing losers to have a vasectomy.
It's just a funny game!

That's the thing though. Liggoti's point is that because pessimism is ontologically sound everything which is an argument "against" it is actually just a way for people to cope with reality. Thus either humans choose to die out gradually or not is irrelevant. I'm not saying people should do bad things of this but if Ligotti is correct, and I think he is, then Amorality is innate in everything and whether the human race allows itself to be wiped out or not makes no difference.

But he acts as if it would be some kind of achievement if they did despite his work demonstrating precisely the poverty of such a concept as "achievement". If there's no heaven or hell and if death and life are equally meaningless "ending suffering" isn't something that should be attached to a work which is striving to argue for the empirical truth of the pessimistic worldview as it stems from opinions which are ultimately relative and irrelevant to the topic of the book.