Death is usually the thing we're all running away from. We spend billions on green juice, gym memberships, and skin creams just to keep the reaper at bay for a few more years. But what if someone told you that the finish line isn't a tragedy, but a favor? That's the core of a fairly radical, often misunderstood philosophical stance. To understand what is a promortalist, you have to peel back layers of conventional morality and look at life through a lens of pure suffering-reduction. It isn't just about "liking" death. It’s the belief that for any sentient being, dying sooner is actually better than dying later.
Hard to swallow? Definitely.
Most people confuse promortalism with being edgy or just having a bad day. It’s actually a deeply logical, albeit grim, extension of certain ethical frameworks. It’s not about "un-aliving" yourself because you're sad; it's a structural argument about the value—or lack thereof—of existence itself. If life is a game where the only way to truly win is to stop playing, then death becomes a positive outcome.
The Logical Engine Behind the Promortalist View
At the heart of the movement is something called "philosophical pessimism." You’ve probably heard of Arthur Schopenhauer. He’s the guy who basically argued that life is just a swing between pain and boredom. If you want something, you suffer because you don't have it. Once you get it, you're bored. Rinse and repeat until you die.
A promortalist takes that baton and runs a marathon with it.
They argue from a position of asymmetry. Think about it: if you exist, you can feel pain. If you don't exist, you don't miss out on pleasure because there’s no "you" to feel the lack of it. This idea was popularized by David Benatar, a professor at the University of Cape Town. In his book Better Never to Have Been, he argues for anti-natalism—the idea that it's wrong to have kids. Promortalism is often seen as the next logical step. If it was a mistake to be born, why keep the mistake going?
Why "Pro-Death" Isn't the Same as Suicidal
We need to clear this up immediately. Being a promortalist doesn't mean you’re actively seeking a way out this second. It’s a value judgment. You can believe that death is preferable to life while still being terrified of the process of dying. Dying usually hurts. Evolution has hard-wired our brains to scream "NO" when we get close to the edge.
Many philosophers distinguish between "the state of being dead" and "the act of dying."
One is a peaceful nothingness; the other is often a messy, painful biological failure.
👉 See also: Why Your Pumpkin Spice Latte at Home Usually Tastes Like Candle Wax (And How to Fix It)
Also, there’s the "harm to others" factor. Peter Wessel Zapffe, a Norwegian philosopher, talked about how humans are "over-equipped" with consciousness. We see the tragedy of our own existence. But even if a promortalist thinks their own death is a "pro," they might stick around because their death would devastate their mom, their kids, or their partner. The philosophy is about the benefit of the state of death, not necessarily a call to immediate action that creates more collateral suffering for the living.
The Role of Sentience and the "Vacuum" Argument
If you look at the works of modern thinkers like Sarah Perry or certain strands of Effective Altruism, the conversation gets even weirder. Some argue that as long as there is life, there is a "vacuum" of need. A hungry animal needs food. A lonely person needs companionship.
Death fills the vacuum. Permanently.
It’s a bit like a business that’s constantly in the red. You keep pumping money into it (food, air, entertainment) just to keep it afloat, but it never turns a profit. A promortalist looks at that ledger and says, "Just close the shop." By ending the existence, you eliminate the need for the "profit" (pleasure) and simultaneously erase the "debt" (pain).
Is it Mentally Ill or Just Brutally Honest?
Society tends to pathologize anyone who doesn't think life is a "gift." If you say you’d rather be dead, people immediately reach for the phone to call a crisis line. And look, in many cases, that’s the right move—clinical depression is a real, physiological clouding of judgment.
But philosophers like Philipp Mainländer didn't necessarily have a chemical imbalance. Mainländer believed that God (or the original unity of the universe) died and fragmented into us, and our purpose is to eventually fade back into the "peace" of non-existence. He saw the "will to die" as a profound realization of the universe’s true goal.
There's a massive difference between:
- "I am in pain and want it to stop." (Clinical/Emotional)
- "Existence is inherently a net-negative for all sentient beings." (Philosophical)
The latter is what defines what is a promortalist. It's a universal claim, not just a personal one. They aren't just saying their life is bad; they're suggesting that life is a bad deal in general.
The Counter-Arguments: Why Most People Disagree
Most of us are "biophilic." We love life. We find meaning in the struggle. Viktor Frankl, a psychiatrist and Holocaust survivor, argued in Man’s Search for Meaning that even in the deepest suffering, we can find a "why" that makes the "how" bearable.
Common pushback includes:
- The Potential for Future Joy: Even if today sucks, tomorrow might be amazing. Death robs you of that lottery ticket.
- The Evolutionary Mandate: We are literally built to survive. Our morality is shaped by things that keep the species going. Promortalism is a "glitch" in that programming.
- Complexity as Value: Some argue that a complex, suffering life is "better" than a simple, painless void because complexity and consciousness are inherently precious.
What Promortalism Teaches Us About Living
You don't have to agree with the "death is better" crowd to learn something from them. They force us to justify why we’re here. If you can’t answer why life is worth the pain, the promortalist argument starts to look uncomfortably logical.
It pushes us toward radical empathy. If you believe existence is a burden, you tend to be much kinder to others who are struggling under that same weight. You stop judging people for "failing" at life and start seeing everyone as fellow passengers on a sinking ship that we might as well make comfortable.
🔗 Read more: The Oldest University in US: Why Everyone Is Still Arguing About It
How to Engage with This Topic Safely
If you find yourself spiraling into these thoughts and it's causing you distress, that’s the line between philosophy and a mental health crisis. Philosophy is for the library; your well-being is for the clinic.
- Read the Source Material: Don't just take a YouTuber's word for it. Look at David Benatar’s The Human Predicament or the works of Thomas Ligotti (specifically The Conspiracy Against the Human Race).
- Check Your Context: Are you feeling this way because life is objectively "bad" for everyone, or because your specific circumstances are overwhelming?
- Talk to a Secular Counselor: If you want to discuss these ideas without being told you're "crazy," find a therapist who specializes in existential dread or philosophical counseling.
Promortalism is the ultimate "black pill," but it’s a necessary part of the human conversation about what it means to be alive. It challenges the "toxic positivity" of modern culture that says we must be happy all the time. Sometimes, acknowledging that existence is heavy is the only way to start making it a little lighter for each other.
Next Steps for Exploration
To truly grasp the nuances of this worldview, your next move should be to research The Benatar Asymmetry. It is the specific logical proof used to show why coming into existence is always a harm. Understanding that one chart will tell you more about the promortalist mind than a hundred articles ever could. Additionally, look into the concept of S-risks (suffering risks) in modern ethics, which explores how we might prevent future suffering on a cosmic scale.