The inherent asymmetry of making procreation decisions
Anti-natalism is the view that procreation should not be permissible under all circumstances. David Benatar is a proponent of anti-natalism who argues that existence always harms and never benefits the person coming into existence. This is due to a basic asymmetry in the values of absent pains and a...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Final Year Project |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2019
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/10356/76555 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Institution: | Nanyang Technological University |
| Language: | English |
| Summary: | Anti-natalism is the view that procreation should not be permissible under all circumstances. David Benatar is a proponent of anti-natalism who argues that existence always harms and never benefits the person coming into existence. This is due to a basic asymmetry in the values of absent pains and absent pleasures. Benatar identifies four procreation asymmetries that support this basic asymmetry. A major issue he has with critics is how they are not able to find an alternative solution that explains all four procreation asymmetries at the same time. I examine Benatar’s asymmetry argument and the objections that it faces. I argue that an inherent asymmetry is found in the process of making procreation decisions. The inherent asymmetry offers an alternative explanation to Benatar’s basic asymmetry that can account for all four procreation asymmetries at the same time. It also has the advantage of holding an inherent significance. However, closer examination shows that the inherent asymmetry leads to anti-natalism as well. It is not possible to deny anti-natalism with the inherent asymmetry even if it serves as an alternative to Benatar’s basic asymmetry for the four procreation asymmetries. |
|---|