The Dark is bad but it's something that has to happen. Eternal stagnation and corruption will eventually lead to worse conditions than if you just bit the bullet in the first place.

This is also why immortality for humans must never be allowed, and any immortals should be hunted down and put to death.

>>17752274
>The question is whether your belief holds up to the evidence
The inherent problem with that attitude, is that the evidence itself has to hold up to evidence, which has to hold up to evidence, which continues ad infinitum. You believe that (empirical) evidence is important for your belief, but what evidence do you have for this belief in itself?
Pondering this, you run into the Munchaussen trilemma,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnchhausen_trilemma
Which points out the obvious epistemological tidbit, that there is only three ways to try to futilely end this cycle of seeking evidence for evidence for evidence:

>The circular argument, in which the proof of some proposition presupposes the truth of that very proposition
>The regressive argument, in which each proof requires a further proof, ad infinitum
>The dogmatic argument, which rests on accepted precepts which are merely asserted rather than defended

And because as you can see, none of these actually satisfy the requirement for proof, there is no actual way to use these methods to verify anything at all, with any true certainty.
Thus, the effort to see if your beliefs stand up to evidence is entirely impossible. Deep down, in the end, it is all a faith-based, unproven belief. It is entirely arbitrary what you believe.

>Idiot. Life is not a simulated game and acting like one just drives you into main-character syndrome
It is entirely arbitrary.