My critique of antinatalism bullshit

[Sustacel250]

I think suffering is not morally defensible. Its not morally serious, I do not consider suffering a real philosophical idea.

Some narrative guru fraudster can show you pics of dying animals, diseases, wars, graped victims of holocaust, kids crying.
A second faker fraudster can show you heroism and beauty and cool smiling families and meditating wise elderly.

Which is why someone whos swindled emotionally by fake ideas pertaining to doomerism can later be swindled a second time and become religious.

Suffering is not moral. Suffering is also very interpretable. Humans can adapt in billions of ways, or cope around problems. Or solve problems. You can even come to use your own brain to detect problems, and suffering becomes like a sensor to you. Brain signaling isnt moral, its a signal at its essence. The part of your brain that produces morality isnt the single chemical reaction that produced suffering, that one was a part of a larger system. Suffering can be explained in many ways and I dont know if the one im attempting now is precise or not. I can say suffering is complex, generated thru neural processes. Moral judgement is even more complex generated by broader systems I surely do not understand.

Pain exists. Cool. But suffering is not sacred, its not proof existing is bad. Its not even philosophy TBH. I dont understand brain science. But any human interpretation is above the single chem signal. Getting signals from your brain isnt enough to build a moral case this is where im going at. Im not brain science but im pretty sure my idea is defensible. I think interpretation is an operation that is already higher level than bare signals alone. So simply deriving ideas from brain signals isnt right and no morality can be derived, no sense of sacred should be legitimized by this logic or at least we have to have the ability to always criticize romance and senses built around "suffering".

what bothers me is I want to assert the truth any romance any aesthetic can be balanced with an opposite one, and all are essentially valid at the same time. Then, once you break this cope of the "ultimate emotional reality" you can also see which emotional interpretation was fitting reality better, has fewer contradictions or what produces outcomes you like and what you dont like. Essentially I think we can simply say 2+2=4 your romance bullshit is bullshit.