Venting I feel so paranoid about what's morally right and wrong. I feel like I am insane.

[Namelesa]

(this was stuff I started writing 2 days ago but didn't have the energy to write fully)

I realized something that has made me feel really really paranoid and conflicted. How am I supposed to know what I am doing and saying is morally correct? What if I am too biased in how I think? What if what I am doing is actually wrong and I don't know it? What if I just believe what I doing is right but it isn't? Am I actually manipulative? But also what if it applies to others morals as well? What if they are biased and wrong? I don't know who to trust when it comes to morals now as any of us could be wrong and we don't know it. Or maybe they are manipulating others to think that wrong is right? Could we be inflicting more pain and suffering with our morals? But if we are actually right we would be letting more suffering happen if we let things be. I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ANYMORE.

I am probably so insane for questioning everything hehehe. I mean some people here even think I am insane so it must be correct hehehe. I am genuinely doing a laugh of insanity right now.

(writing from now)

Okay I am bit calmer now but that's mostly just cus of not wanting to think about it too much. I am still paranoid about what's right and think I am insane and potential evil. It can literally be about anything. I feel like sometimes I don't even know basic morals that most people know. I feel evil for not understanding others morals sometimes as that means something is wrong with me that I can't think correctly. Why do I see good in things that people see that are bad and see bad things that other see as good? One person has to be the more morally correct one here right? But who is it? I don't know and that makes me paranoid on what to do. I need to lessen the suffering in this world so I need to correct people that are wrong but who knows whose the correct one here? Am I just causing more issues arguing when they were in the right or potential making others more immoral or am I doing the right thing by causing issues on those who are immoral and maybe potentially making them better people?

I am more frozen in what I should being doing now. I don't want to hurt or cause issues by arguing on innocent people but I feel like I should argue back at those who have wrong views and do bad actions. Everything feels risky now. Its probably best for me to be alone forever or kill myself so I can't cause any potential issues or suffering or making others more immoral.

 

[StrugglingSienna]

I'm going to respond to this more fully later bc I have to go into work in 2 minutes, but I wanted to say something right now. I think that you should stand up for what you believe is right, but you should also try to understand where people are coming from.

But also, where do you think morals come from? In order for you or the other person to be "more right," it would imply that there is some higher moral authority above you (God, I suppose) or otherswise that morals come from a place of objective truth. Many people do believe that morality is objective truth, but do you believe that? Many other people including myself believe that morality is highly subjective based on your personal values, so in that case it could be that both you are right, because your morals are based on your own values and reality, and there is no higher judge of who is more moral.

Sorry, this was probably more confusing that helpful... I'll come back to this thread later.

 

[Namelesa]

I'm going to respond to this more fully later bc I have to go into work in 2 minutes, but I wanted to say something right now. I think that you should stand up for what you believe is right, but you should also try to understand where people are coming from.

But also, where do you think morals come from? In order for you or the other person to be "more right," it would imply that there is some higher moral authority above you (God, I suppose) or otherswise that morals come from a place of objective truth. Many people do believe that morality is objective truth, but do you believe that? Many other people including myself believe that morality is highly subjective based on your personal values, so in that case it could be that both you are right, because your morals are based on your own values and reality, and there is no higher judge of who is more moral.

Sorry, this was probably more confusing that helpful... I'll come back to this thread later.

Don't worry <3 I understood what you are saying and about

I would say good morals are knowing what action cause the least amount of suffering and provides the most positivity to others. I would say there is one objective true morals and I don't believe in religion. Somethings just have objective truth such as 2 + 2 = 4. Surely morals have objective truth like you shouldn't torture innocent people or kill someone who wants to live, isn't suffering and is providing things to other? What if we just blind to see some of our morals as bad like pro lifers are transphobes think their actions are good?

 

[Forever Sleep]

In terms of action, I think a good standard is: Would I be ok with someone treating me this way? Or, someone I care about this way?

In terms of opinion- we're bound to have differences. So long as we're putting our views forward in a civil way, I think it's important to express differences of opinion and- why we hold them. If we just keep quiet about them, surely they just fester.

When it comes to our own inner thoughts and opinions, it's complicated. I don't always like some of the thoughts I have- prejudices etc. I can recognise that because I admire people who are more open minded than me. So- that makes me challenge why I have some of these thoughts and how reasonable they are. Some of our perceptions are likely inherited from our parents- so- that can be hard to shake entirely if we feel like they might be biased. Some is lived experience too.

The knots I get myself into tend to be: There are clearly problems in this world. But, how best do we solve them where everyone gets a fair chance to live the life they want? The problem is- I don't know! Which tends to reinforce the feeling that I just want out of it.

 

[beeptad]

I think the only way to `know` if you're being good or bad is to ask what your intentions are. If you genuinely care for people and are concered about them, then in your heart you must be a good person. In my opinion the fact you're questioning everything here shows that you truly care about right and wrong and I think that matters a lot. How many people in history did morally evil shit (slavery, torture, pillage, etc) because their society/religion/culture deemed it correct and never seriously considered what they were doing is wrong. It seems silly to me to believe that we must be in the one age in history in which culture is fully correct about morality so there must be things we accept that are wrong and the only way to find out is to relentlessly examine every belief we have.

 

[Namelesa]

I'm going to respond to this more fully later

Just wondering what you were going to say. You don't have to if you don't want to, I am just curious sorry...

 

[Tombs_in_your_eyes]

Have you ever been assessed for obsessive compulsive disorder? From what you've described, it's possible that you have a subtype of OCD called scrupulosity OCD. All types of OCD are highly treatable with a type of therapy called exposure and response prevention, if you're in a position to access/afford that.

 

[FrozenOcean]

I'm convinced there is no right or wrong, that is a human construct, but clearly one that is wrapped up in our evolution. At the end of the day you only have yourself to answer to, if it distresses you to live in an immoral way then don't do it.

 

[needwaytohell]

the only thing I feel is moral in universe is being nice to people regardless of any character. Nice is a really loose term to be thrown around tho ;_) I feel there isn't a solid ground on what's good/bad it's all relative and largely driven by choices of life itself. In my viewpoint helping can come in terms of knowledge and support.

 

[whitenoise-]

(this may not be very comforting particularly, but just my broad thoughts)

perhaps this is because i think morals are a bit more subjective, but i think it's okay not to fully understand where someone else's morals are coming from. even if there is an objective set of morals, i think people's personal moral codes are largely shaped more by their experiences and how they navigate around society, and i imagine that there will be some part of our morals that will be thought of as wrong in the future (think about how evil we think some of the practices people performed in the past are, or using your example, or how much transphobia is seen as normal even today among people).

that being said, i don't think this means that everything should be doubted. using your examples, i think there's a lot of things any sensible person can agree on, in terms of not torturing innocent people for example! for me personally, i try to follow the best morals i can based on what i know at the moment, and i think we generally know enough to instinctually know what's moral in most cases, especially if we're open minded about considering alternate points of view before judging them. i think in general, i tend to feel like i can be confident about what i think is moral as long as i'm making sure that i routinely genuinely consider other viewpoints and arguments, and appeal to my sense of what's right, since at the end, once people fully understand the different arguments, i think most people would come to the same conclusion as imo most people fundamentally have a similar idea of what's right.

i don't know too much about these things outside a small part of an introductory course i took once, but from what you've said, you sound like you would be closest to a rule utilitarian in terms of your morals. broadly speaking, rule utilitarians think that if an action, when used as a general rule by everyone, would lead to more happiness/less suffering, then this action is moral. if you haven't already, maybe reading more about that could make you feel more grounded in morals?

 

[The_Hunter]

I completely agree with your assertion that morality should come from our own humanity and reason first, and not rely on any higher being.

There is no species of reasoning more common, more useful, and even necessary to human life, than that which is derived from the testimony of men.

– David Hume

It's very important indeed. Illustrated by things like Euthyphro's Dilemma. We ultimately must rely on ourselves and our rationality for our own morals, even if we think we're getting some kind of divine warrant (which even if was the case, would immediately be nullified through the inherent modification of human understanding).

It is an absolutely essential truth for living in the modern world, where we cannot afford to surrender ourselves solely to quotations as we are endlessly plunged into new situations that we have never thought of before. We must understand for ourselves first and foremost, and understand that there are situations where we truly do have fair faculty & basis (knowledge-wise or other) to make the right decision. We must seize that responsibility and make the right choice--and to defer that away from ourselves is just the wrong move. Maybe we don't know! Better to admit that than think we know it all.

We might indeed be right. We cannot throw this idea out the window.

I found your point highly clear and certainly helpful. Please do come back to it later, if you have the wish to.

Best of luck, friend. Wish the world had more people like you, who yearned for rational morality and wish to spread the importance of it. Thank you for existing. Peace.

 

[Ferreter]

What you're feeling is perfectly natural, even for some disorders like OCD it happens with intrusive thoughts and whatnot, you're not alone in struggiling with it.

 

[Namelesa]

Have you ever been assessed for obsessive compulsive disorder? From what you've described, it's possible that you have a subtype of OCD called scrupulosity OCD. All types of OCD are highly treatable with a type of therapy called exposure and response prevention, if you're in a position to access/afford that.

Interesting. It does sound like it does apply to me. Tho I don't feel it's right for me to get treatment for this. I have done really bad things so I deserve to be paranoid and to hate myself for it so I am more incentivised not to do it again. I need to be careful not to keep making mistakes so I need to think this way.

 

[NoMoreSanity]

Do you want the cruel thuth?

 

[Namelesa]

Do you want the cruel thuth?

sure? what are you saying is this truth?

 

[Namelesa]

You will never be moral. Especially if you follow the ideas that ijustwishtodie did. There is no ethical or moral things you can do in this life. You will always harm something by merely existing. We all do. This is why life is evil. Much like ijustwishtodie would say, it's best to die early. Id say just don't have kids and be vegan. That's as "moral" or "ethical" as you'll get. We are all evil. Except that and if you want, try and get out of the game. Whatever other solution people offer is stupid. Stop tormenting yourself. No one is moral. Life is immoral.

I mean I agree with this to a degree. Everyone will cause pain by existing as we will make mistakes and cause suffering to others to survive and to benefit ourselves but also can't we do good acts for others as well? I mean people here valuing me makes it seem like I am doing some good and of some help right? I do agree with not having kids and being vegen (tho I am finding the vegen really difficult and have only gotten to be vegetarian) to be moral.

 

[NoMoreSanity]

I mean I agree with this to a degree. Everyone will cause pain by existing as we will make mistakes and cause suffering to others to survive and to benefit themselves but also can't we do good acts for others as well? I mean people here valuing me makes it seem like I am doing some good and of some help right? I do agree with not having kids and being vegen (tho I am finding the vegen really difficult and have only gotten to be vegetarian) to be moral.

No. There is no good in this world. You were a follower of ijustwishtodie right? I think he kind of made this point in a few of his posts. I looked at his account a little and this is the idea I got from it ( no disrespect to the dead ofc ).

 

[frommolecules2stars]

You will never be moral. Especially if you follow the ideas that ijustwishtodie did. There is no ethical or moral things you can do in this life. You will always harm something by merely existing. We all do. This is why life is evil. Much like ijustwishtodie would say, it's best to die early. Id say just don't have kids and be vegan. That's as "moral" or "ethical" as you'll get. We are all evil. Except that and if you want, try and get out of the game. Whatever other solution people offer is stupid. Stop tormenting yourself. No one is moral. Life is immoral.

Interesting take. I disagree.

I don't think you can say life is fundamentally immoral because if evil exists, good must then, too. To be evil essentially is to act against the objective moral truths. And if all of existence is evil then.. where is the good? Where is the established moral truths? Do these moral truths only exist in non-existence? Logically, that is impossible.

My take on it is that there are no objective moral truths. Morality is not a science. There are no eternal facts in which this universe follows. In fact, morality as it exists is dependent on emotion and which emotion is commonly felt among society. This is where we find "rape is wrong, killing is bad, theft is evil," etc. And it is evident when we find isolated societies that go against these so called eternal moral truths. If true and factual, why else does it occur?

So, OP, the way morality works in the framework of our society is subjective. But I see the bigger picture, you are worried of being ostracized for holding the "wrong" morals. My blunt advice: follow what society at large thinks. Either way you will be alienated. Of course, you can still have your own opinions, but if they disagree with most rules then I'd advise you to keep them to yourself.

t. A Moral Nihilist

 

[NoMoreSanity]

Interesting take. I disagree.

I don't think you can say life is fundamentally immoral because if evil exists, good must then, too. To be evil essentially is to act against the objective moral truths. And if all of existence is evil then.. where is the good? Where is the established moral truths? Do these moral truths only exist in non-existence? Logically, that is impossible.

My take on it is that there are no objective moral truths. Morality is not a science. There are no eternal facts in which this universe follows. In fact, morality as it exists is dependent on emotion and which emotion is commonly felt among society. This is where we find "rape is wrong, killing is bad, theft is evil," etc. And it is evident when we find isolated societies that go against these so called eternal moral truths. If true and factual, why else does it occur?

So, OP, the way morality works in the framework of our society is subjective. But I see the bigger picture, you are worried of being ostracized for holding the "wrong" morals. My blunt advice: follow what society at large thinks. Either way you will be alienated. Of course, you can still have your own opinions, but if they disagree with most rules then I'd advise you to keep them to yourself.

t. A Moral Nihilist

False evil does exist without good. That is life.

 

[Namelesa]

No. There is no good in this world. You were a follower of ijustwishtodie right? I think he kind of made this point in a few of his posts. I looked at his account a little and this is the idea I got from it ( no disrespect to the dead ofc ).

While yes I am a big fan of ijustwishtodie and heavily agreed with him on points such as anti-natalism, veganism and that death itself is not at all bad for the person that dies but I have some differences in views. I understand the world having no benefit to anyone cus in non existence we can't suffer nor want or desire anything meaning nothing is lost but in life we can potential suffer more than experience good things which is why I am anti-natalist but I don't necessarily think life is always bad. I would say life can be a neutral thing if the person's life is of more good than suffering and they provide more help to others than harm. People are sometimes forced to continue life or they don't want to go through the painful process of ctb which is totally understandable but they are still suffering greatly so isn't it morally good to help support them, whether that's help to manage their life or to advice them on methods if they ask for that? If I was dead, these people would suffer more. Thats my main reason for continuing life at the moment. Its also going to be more harder for me to ctb cus of my lack of access to methods cus of my family trapping me home. Is it really immoral to continue life if you are able to provide something positive to others and that suicide is really really difficult? This is at least morally neutral in my opinion.

 

[rubyharv]

Its probably best for me to be alone forever or kill myself so I can't cause any potential issues

Your belief that you should be alone forever is fear in my eyes.

People who are truly harmful don't agonize over morality like you do. Withdrawing or worse would only multiply suffering - both yours and that of people who care about you. Your deep concern about doing right proves you're not what you fear. What you actually need isn't isolation, but more compassion for yourself.

death itself is not at all bad for the person that dies but I have some differences in views. I understand the world having no benefit to anyone cus in non existence we can't suffer nor want or desire anything meaning nothing is lost but in life we can potential suffer more than experience good things which is why I am anti-natalist but I don't necessarily think life is always bad. I would say life can be a neutral thing if the person's life is of more good than suffering and they provide more help to others than harm. People are sometimes forced to continue life or they don't want to go through the painful process of ctb which is totally understandable but they are still suffering greatly so isn't it morally good to help support them, whether that's help to manage their life or to advice them on methods if they ask for that? If I was dead, these people would suffer more. Thats my main reason for continuing life at the moment. Its also going to be more harder for me to ctb cus of my lack of access to methods cus of my family trapping me home. Is it really immoral to continue life if you are able to provide something positive to others and that suicide is really really difficult? This is at least morally neutral in my opinion.

I agree that if someone's life is net-positive (for themselves and others), then yeah, it's morally neutral—maybe even good—to keep going. And you're right that access to methods (or lack thereof) plays a huge role in whether suicide is even an option. It's fucked up how little control people actually have over their own lives in that way.

But I'd push back a little on death being completely neutral. Even if the dead person doesn't experience loss, the living do—which matters if we're talking morality. And if you're staying alive because you're helping others, that's not just neutral—that's actively good, right? Like, you're choosing to reduce suffering despite your own struggles, and that's kind of heroic in a way.

That said, I get why you feel trapped. It's exhausting to keep going just because the alternative is hard or because others need you. I hope you're also giving yourself permission to exist for yourself sometimes, not just as a moral obligation.

 

[NoMoreSanity]

While yes I am a big fan of ijustwishtodie and heavily agreed with him on points such as anti-natalism, veganism and that death itself is not at all bad for the person that dies but I have some differences in views. I understand the world having no benefit to anyone cus in non existence we can't suffer nor want or desire anything meaning nothing is lost but in life we can potential suffer more than experience good things which is why I am anti-natalist but I don't necessarily think life is always bad. I would say life can be a neutral thing if the person's life is of more good than suffering and they provide more help to others than harm. People are sometimes forced to continue life or they don't want to go through the painful process of ctb which is totally understandable but they are still suffering greatly so isn't it morally good to help support them, whether that's help to manage their life or to advice them on methods if they ask for that? If I was dead, these people would suffer more. Thats my main reason for continuing life at the moment. Its also going to be more harder for me to ctb cus of my lack of access to methods cus of my family trapping me home. Is it really immoral to continue life if you are able to provide something positive to others and that suicide is really really difficult? This is at least morally neutral in my opinion.

Agree to disagree i suppose. It's up to you to decide. I can't tell you what's the truth anymore, because I don't know. We all die. Just try not to do anything That bad to yourself or others

 

[SilentSadness]

(this was stuff I started writing 2 days ago but didn't have the energy to write fully)

I realized something that has made me feel really really paranoid and conflicted. How am I supposed to know what I am doing and saying is morally correct? What if I am too biased in how I think? What if what I am doing is actually wrong and I don't know it? What if I just believe what I doing is right but it isn't? Am I actually manipulative? But also what if it applies to others morals as well? What if they are biased and wrong? I don't know who to trust when it comes to morals now as any of us could be wrong and we don't know it. Or maybe they are manipulating others to think that wrong is right? Could we be inflicting more pain and suffering with our morals? But if we are actually right we would be letting more suffering happen if we let things be. I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ANYMORE.

I am probably so insane for questioning everything hehehe. I mean some people here even think I am insane so it must be correct hehehe. I am genuinely doing a laugh of insanity right now.

(writing from now)

Okay I am bit calmer now but that's mostly just cus of not wanting to think about it too much. I am still paranoid about what's right and think I am insane and potential evil. It can literally be about anything. I feel like sometimes I don't even know basic morals that most people know. I feel evil for not understanding others morals sometimes as that means something is wrong with me that I can't think correctly. Why do I see good in things that people see that are bad and see bad things that other see as good? One person has to be the more morally correct one here right? But who is it? I don't know and that makes me paranoid on what to do. I need to lessen the suffering in this world so I need to correct people that are wrong but who knows whose the correct one here? Am I just causing more issues arguing when they were in the right or potential making others more immoral or am I doing the right thing by causing issues on those who are immoral and maybe potentially making them better people?

I am more frozen in what I should being doing now. I don't want to hurt or cause issues by arguing on innocent people but I feel like I should argue back at those who have wrong views and do bad actions. Everything feels risky now. Its probably best for me to be alone forever or kill myself so I can't cause any potential issues or suffering or making others more immoral.

I understand your hurt and confusion, hope you can find some comfort. I've studied a number of moral frameworks and came to a simple conclusion. The truth is that there are no objective morals and it's very easy to demonstrate. The only thing that matters is your own emotions and decisions. If a magic book decreed suicide was wrong, would you believe it? If the creator of the universe said that suicidal people are evil, would that make it immoral? Of course not, morals cannot be derived from the physical world or reason. Even if you hurt others, you can go to your grave believing fully that you are right. Because emotions drive actions.

 

[getoutgirl]

Hey, hope you don't mind I jump in as the idiot. Everyone here seems to know a lot more of philosophy and ethics than I do. I know shit. But here is a rant cos I can't sleep :D

I also wouldn't like to add to your paranoia or moral discomfort by intervining, I know I disagree with you on some things, though I still respect your opinion, so feel free to ignore this if you think it can affect you negatively even in the slightest. I also don't want to cause harm to others.

Out of the way I'd like to say that it's normal to question your morality. I often obsess over whether my actions are evil and cause pain on my loved ones, so I get the call to isolate and stay as far away from them (and maybe die). Then I isolate and obsess over whether my inaction and isolation is selfish and evil. I have no solution for this. I can only relate.
Also, I think that if you are staying alive to help and alleviate the suffering of others, that's good. If you worry about others to a point you hurt over worrying about how you worry about others... Means you have a good heart, and you are kind and caring, even if you try and rationalize it with ethics, same to me. The root is You Care. That's good on my book.

I do think that if people value you here you are doing good. Great really. Because people here are most in need so I'm glad you are around helping.

I really disagree with some advice here tho. I agree with veganism (though like you can't quite get there) and I haven't read any anti-natalism. But: "It's impossible to make a good act on the world" "Life can't be more than neutral" "You better follow what society at large thinks and keep your unique values to yourself" ...
I'm sorry those are bullshit. I can respect those opinions AND think they are bullshit. Specially the latter, in practice. There is no MoralMeternator™, but you should stick up for what you believe and definetly not follow fkin sOciETy, be open to the beliefs of others knowing they are in the same position as you. I think life Can be good And that you can do good things for others in it. Period. or colon maybe Let empathy be an ethical compass and you'll get there.

The means matter tho. I'll be honest here. Lots of people have done henious things to others trying to "lessen the suffering in the world". Intentions are a good start. So I get your concern. From what I've collected anti-natalism can have that negative potential with good intentions if wielded like those comments. That's but my opinion though, and not two people have ever held the exact same morals.

rant ends here else i go forever gnight

 

[Namelesa]

But I'd push back a little on death being completely neutral. Even if the dead person doesn't experience loss, the living do—which matters if we're talking morality. And if you're staying alive because you're helping others, that's not just neutral—that's actively good, right? Like, you're choosing to reduce suffering despite your own struggles, and that's kind of heroic in a way.

That said, I get why you feel trapped. It's exhausting to keep going just because the alternative is hard or because others need you. I hope you're also giving yourself permission to exist for yourself sometimes, not just as a moral obligation.

Btw thank you for the rest of what you said <3 I just want to comment on these parts specifically.

To me something can negatively effect someone but not be considered an immoral action. Suicide while can effect the people living negatively, isn't a immoral action as its fair to leave this life we were forced into. I don't think I will ever see the point in living for myself as to me death is equal to a good life. I don't see how my life benefits me in anyway and only see it benefiting others.

I really disagree with some advice here tho. I agree with veganism (though like you can't quite get there) and I haven't read any anti-natalism. But: "It's impossible to make a good act on the world" "Life can't be more than neutral" "You better follow what society at large thinks and keep your unique values to yourself" ...
I'm sorry those are bullshit. I can respect those opinions AND think they are bullshit. Specially the latter, in practice. There is no MoralMeternator™, but you should stick up for what you believe and definetly not follow fkin sOciETy, be open to the beliefs of others knowing they are in the same position as you. I think life Can be good And that you can do good things for others in it. Period. or colon maybe Let empathy be an ethical compass and you'll get there.

thank you as well for the rest of what you said <3 I just want to comment on this part specifically.

I definitely agree that you can make good acts on the world and that you shouldn't follow what society thinks always. If we always followed society then stuff like sexism, racism and homophobia would be much more prominent. Tho to me life can't be more than neutral (or maybe can be good but death would still equal that) for the person that owns that life as if they won't have lost or gained anything if they died or didn't exist at all. A life is only really beneficial to others that are still alive, not the person living that life.

 

[rubyharv]

To me something can negatively effect someone but not be considered an immoral action. Suicide while can effect the people living negatively, isn't a immoral action as its fair to leave this life we were forced into. I don't think I will ever see the point in living for myself as to me death is equal to a good life. I don't see how my life benefits me in anyway and only see it benefiting others.

You're right that negative impact doesn't automatically make something immoral. If life feels imposed, it makes sense that leaving wouldn't be a moral failing.

But when you say death equals a good life, it sounds less like a neutral stance and more like you've been denied any version of living that doesn't revolve around serving others. That imbalance isn't philosophy. It's the result of being failed by circumstances, by people, maybe by your own brain.

You don't have to agree that your life can benefit you. But consider this: if you saw someone else articulate that belief, wouldn't it strike you as tragic, not neutral?

 

[getoutgirl]

I definitely agree that you can make good acts on the world and that you shouldn't follow what society thinks always. If we always followed society then stuff like sexism, racism and homophobia would be much more prominent. Tho to me life can't be more than neutral (or maybe can be good but death would still equal that) for the person that owns that life as if they won't have lost or gained anything if they died or didn't exist at all. A life is only really beneficial to others that are still alive, not the person living that life.

See that's the thing I can't wrap my head around. Yet it seems very central to your overall thinking. If you believe that as truth then yeah a lot of the other stuff makes sense and follows suit rationaly.

I think you do lose things when you die. You don't get to perceive that loss tho, True. It's not like you get a GAME OVER screen and get to sit there for eternity lamenting over it. So I get why in a way you can frame it as not losing. There is no you left. And still...

But when you say death equals a good life, it sounds less like a neutral stance and more like you've been denied any version of living that doesn't revolve around serving others. That imbalance isn't philosophy. It's the result of being failed by circumstances, by people, maybe by your own brain.

This! Seriously. Everyone dies, but there are people who do lead happy lives, truly prefer it to being dead, and when that time comes in their death beds they think "That was worth it". And yeah then they die and it's void. But that prior life was worth it and they enjoyed it. It can be enjoyed, regardless if in death you are unable to regret it. It can have positive value in on itself. Hard to wrap around, harder to quantize or put on a spreadsheet, but it's there anyways.
I would agree with @rubyharv in thinking there may be some circumstances making it imposible for you to even consider the posibility of living a good life, which would suck and in any case I'm sorry that is not a posibility for you as it is for others.

In that line, I also don't get "A life is only really beneficial to others that are still alive, not the person living that life." doesn't that run into a paradox? How can it be beneficial to those people if those people themselves can't have a beneficial life? I get why you may think that if you are the subject of that statement, if you have that core belief. Otherwise I don't see it.
Lots of hugs at ya <3333