David Benatar

Most people believe that they were either benefited or at least not harmed by being brought into existence. Thus, if they ever do reflect on whether they should bring others into existence---rather than having children without even thinking about whether they should---they presume that they do them no harm. Better Never to Have Been challenges these assumptions. David Benatar argues that coming into existence is always a serious harm. Although the good things in one's life make one's life go better than it otherwise would have gone, one could not have been deprived by their absence if one had not existed. Those who never exist cannot be deprived. However, by coming into existence one does suffer quite serious harms that could not have befallen one had one not come into existence. Drawing on the relevant psychological literature, the author shows that there are a number of well-documented features of human psychology that explain why people systematically overestimate the quality of their lives and why they are thus resistant to the suggestion that they were seriously harmed by being brought into existence. The author then argues for the 'anti-natal' view---that it is always wrong to have children---and he shows that combining the anti-natal view with common pro-choice views about foetal moral status yield a 'pro-death' view about abortion (at the earlier stages of gestation). Anti-natalism also implies that it would be better if humanity became extinct. Although counter-intuitive for many, that implication is defended, not least by showing that it solves many conundrums of moral theory about population.

The Harm of Coming into Existence

Better Never to Have Been:The Harm of Coming into Existence

Are human lives ultimately meaningless? Is our inevitable death bad? Would immortality be better? Should we hasten our deaths by taking our own lives in acts of suicide? Many people ask these big questions and many are plagued by them. Surprisingly few analytic philosophers have spoken tothese important questions. When they have engaged the big existential questions they have tended, like more popular writers, to offer comforting, optimistic answers. The Human Predicament offers a less sanguine assessment. David Benatar invites readers to take a clear-eyed view of our situation,defending a substantial, but not unmitigated, pessimism about human life. Benatar argues that while our lives can have some meaning, cosmically speaking we are ultimately the insignificant beings that we often fear we are. A candid appraisal reveals that the quality of life, although less bad for some people than for others, leaves much to be desired in even the bestcases. But death, David Benatar argues, is hardly the solution. Our mortality exacerbates rather than mitigates our cosmic meaninglessness. It can release us from suffering but even when it does it imposes another cost - annihilation. This unfortunate state of affairs has nuanced implications forhow we should think about immortality, about suicide, and about the aspects of life in which we can and do find deeper meaning. Engaging profound existential questions with analytic rigor and clarity, The Human Predicament is clear eyed, unsentimental, and deeply provocative to some of our mostcherished beliefs.

Life Without Illusions

The Human Predicament

Does sexism against men exist? What it looks like and why we need to take it seriously This book draws attention to the "second sexism," where it exists, how it works and what it looks like, and responds to those who would deny that it exists. Challenging conventional ways of thinking, it examines controversial issues such as sex-based affirmative action, gender roles, and charges of anti-feminism. The book offers an academically rigorous argument in an accessible style, including the careful use of empirical data, and includes examples and engages in a discussion of how sex discrimination against men and boys also undermines the cause for female equality.

Discrimination Against Men and Boys

The Second Sexism

David Archard

Seven essays on some of the main ethical issues raised by producing and rearing children.

The Ethics of Bearing and Rearing Children

Procreation and Parenthood

David Wasserman

In this volume, two authors debate the ethics of procreation. One argues for the anti-natalist view that procreation is never morally permissible. In support of that conclusion he advances a number of arguments. In the second half of the book, the second author identifies a variety of moderate pro-natalist positions, which all see procreation as sometimes permissible but never required.

Is it Wrong to Reproduce?

Debating Procreation

Meglio non essere mai nati. Il dolore di venire al mondo

Destructive forces have been eroding the University of Cape Town, Africa's leading university. This book tells the sad, true tale of what has been transpiring. It is a saga of lunacy, criminality, pandering, and identity politics. The mad and the bad - the deranged, deluded, the depraved - have been granted endless latitude in bullying and abusing others. The decline began in 2015 with the Rhodes Must Fall protest that resulted in the offending statue's removal within a month, and which spawned similar protests abroad. Emboldened by their local success, the protestors issued new and ever-increasing demands later that year and then again in 2016 and 2017. Their methods also became criminal - including intimidation, assault, and arson. The university leadership capitulated to this behaviour, and this fostered a broader and now pervasive toxic environment within the institution. These developments offer important lessons for universities around the world that are yielding to the forces of a faux "progressivism".

Africa's Leading University in Decline

The Fall of the University of Cape Town

When the benefits of surgery do not outweigh the harms or where they do not clearly do so, surgical interventions become morally contested. Cutting to the Core examines a number of such surgeries, including infant male circumcision and cutting the genitals of female children, the separation of conjoined twins, surgical sex assignment of intersex children and the surgical re-assignment of transsexuals, limb and face transplantation, cosmetic surgery, and placebo surgery.

Exploring the Ethics of Contested Surgeries

Cutting to the Core

Do our lives have meaning? Should we create more people? Is death bad? Should we commit suicide? Would it be better if we were immortal? Should we be optimistic or pessimistic? Life, Death, and Meaning brings together key readings, primarily by English-speaking philosophers, on such 'big questions.'

Key Philosophical Readings on the Big Questions

Life, Death & Meaning

Professor and Head of Philosophy David Benatar

This high quality 2 track hypnotherapy CD by hypnotherapist Glenn Harrold, combines powerful clinical hypnotherapy techniques with state of the art digital recording technology.

Ethics for Everyday with Free Ethics PowerWeb

David T. Wasserman

Most people believe that they were either benefited or at least not harmed by being brought into existence. Thus, if they ever do reflect on whether they should bring others into existence—-rather than having children without even thinking about whether they should—-they presume that they do them no harm. Better Never to Have Been challenges these assumptions. David Benatar argues that coming into existence is always a serious harm. Although the good things in one's life make one's life go better than it otherwise would have gone, one could not have been deprived by their absence if one had not existed. Those who never exist cannot be deprived. However, by coming into existence one does suffer quite serious harms that could not have befallen one had one not come into existence. Drawing on the relevant psychological literature, the author shows that there are a number of well-documented features of human psychology that explain why people systematically overestimate the quality of their lives and why they are thus resistant to the suggestion that they were seriously harmed by being brought into existence. The author then argues for the 'anti-natal' view—-that it is always wrong to have children—-and he shows that combining the anti-natal view with common pro-choice views about foetal moral status yield a 'pro-death' view about abortion (at the earlier stages of gestation). Anti-natalism also implies that it would be better if humanity became extinct. Although counter-intuitive for many, that implication is defended, not least by showing that it solves many conundrums of moral theory about population.

Better Never to Have Been

Být či nebýt? Mám přivést na tento svět a do této nejasné doby své děti? Ti, kdo si pokládají tyto otázky a nechtějí jednat pouze tak, jak se od nich obecně očekává, bývají svým okolím často ostrakizováni. A přitom uvažujeme-li o těchto věcech čistě racionálně, zjistíme, jsme-li zodpovědní vůči svým potenciálním potomkům, že tato volba není vůbec jednoduchá. Jihoafrický filozof David Benatar ve své knize například obhajuje jasné antinatalistické stanovisko, tedy že mít děti je vždy špatně. Každý z nás tím, že se narodil, utrpěl. Toto utrpení není zanedbatelné, neboť kvalita i toho nejlepšího života je velice bídná – a značně bídnější, než si většina lidí přiznává. I když je pochopitelně příliš pozdě zabránit své vlastní existenci, není pozdě zabránit existenci dalších lidí v budoucnosti. Plodit nové lidi se v této době zdá morálně problematické. Ti, kdo neexistují, totiž nemohou zakoušet žádnou deprivaci. Příchodem na svět utrpíme vážnou újmu, která by nás bývala nepostihla, kdybychom se byli nenarodili. Vzhledem k hlubokému odporu vůči názorům, které kniha obhajuje, se nedá očekávat, že by racionální argumenty měly nějaký vliv na plození dětí. Plození pokračuje a zřejmě přese vše bude pokračovat dál… Existuje nějaký způsob, jak lidskou arogancí a nadutostí otřást v samotných základech?

O utrpení, které přináší příchod na tento svět

Nebýt či být

While procreation is ubiquitous, attention to the ethical issues involved in creating children is relatively rare. In Debating Procreation, David Benatar and David Wasserman take opposing views on this important question. David Benatar argues for the anti-natalist view that it is always wrong to bring new people into existence. He argues that coming into existence is always a serious harm and that even if it were not always so, the risk of serious harm is sufficiently great to make procreation wrong. In addition to these "philanthropic" arguments, he advances the "misanthropic" one that because humans are so defective and cause vast amounts of harm, it is wrong to create more of them. David Wasserman defends procreation against the anti-natalist challenge. He outlines a variety of moderate pro-natalist positions, which all see procreation as often permissible but never required. After criticizing the main anti-natalist arguments, he reviews those pronatalist positions. He argues that constraints on procreation are best understood in terms of the role morality of prospective parents, considers different views of that role morality, and argues for one that imposes only limited constraints based on the well-being of the future child. He then argues that the expected good of a future child and of the parent-child relationship can provide a strong justification for procreation in the face of expected adversities without giving individuals any moral reason to procreate

Is It Wrong to Reproduce?

Are our lives meaningful, or meaningless? Is our inevitable death a bad thing? Would immortality be an improvement? Would it be better, all things considered, to hasten our deaths by suicide? Many people ask these big questions -- and some people are plagued by them. Surprisingly, analytic philosophers have said relatively little about these important questions about the meaning of life. When they have tackled the big questions, they have tended, like popular writers, to offer comforting, optimistic answers. The Human Predicament invites readers to take a clear-eyed and unfettered view of the human condition. David Benatar here offers a substantial, but not unmitigated, pessimism about the central questions of human existence. He argues that while our lives can have some meaning, we are ultimately the insignificant beings that we fear we might be. He maintains that the quality of life, although less bad for some than for others, leaves much to be desired in even the best cases. Worse, death is generally not a solution; in fact, it exacerbates rather than mitigates our cosmic meaninglessness. While it can release us from suffering, it imposes another cost - annihilation. This state of affairs has nuanced implications for how we should think about many things, including immortality and suicide, and how we should think about the possibility of deeper meaning in our lives. Ultimately, this thoughtful, provocative, and deeply candid treatment of life's big questions will interest anyone who has contemplated why we are here, and what the answer means for how we should live.

A Candid Guide to Life's Biggest Questions

Life, Death, and Meaning is designed to introduce students to the key existential questions of philosophy.

David Benatar

About

Books

Join the club