In the contemporary debate of the morality of childbirth comes about two radical view of Natalism and Anti-natalism; obviously, the latter is a cursory rejection of the former.
Natalism is belief that promotes reproduction as desirable for social reasons and to ensure national continuance. Anti-natalism, on the other hand, is the philosophical standpoint, which gives a negative value to birth. Its most popular claim is that coming to existence is a net harm because suffering is inevitable; therefore, we shouldn’t bring people into existence. For the anti-natalist’s, Suffering takes precedence over happiness. They hold that potential happy people will not miss being happy because they never existed in the first place. On the other hand, suffering …show more content…
This issue I find very significant because the positions mentioned will radically affect how we see bringing people unto existence and even more so, existence itself. With anti-natalism, existence will inherently be seen as meaningless. Anti-natalism can be seen as an extension of another view regarding the meaning of life since it basically holds that living in itself is enough for someone to want to or be conceived. Moreover, a child cannot be born for its own sake, and it puts out that life is pointless because of our inevitable suffering. It holds that no one should exist because there is no point in existing for we are merely puppets; we are self-conscious nothings, and our self-consciousness deceive us that we are something. There is no point in bringing more beings that are like this. Anti-natalism regards the creation of life to be meaningless, in a sense, nothing more than a selfish choice (parent wanting to pass on their knowledge and genes trying to be 'immortal' in a sense) or an effect of sexual …show more content…
I will first discuss its reliance on the asymmetry argument and the Utilitarian view of morality. Throughout his book, “Better Never to Have Been: the harm of coming into existence” (2006), we can see how he reiterated in different circumstances the “badness” of coming into existence. He says, “Each one of us was harmed by being brought into existence. That harm is not negligible, because the quality of even the best lives is very bad—and considerably worse than most people recognize it to be. Although it is obviously too late to prevent our own existence, it is not too late to prevent the existence of future possible people.” (Benatar, 2006,
Natalism is belief that promotes reproduction as desirable for social reasons and to ensure national continuance. Anti-natalism, on the other hand, is the philosophical standpoint, which gives a negative value to birth. Its most popular claim is that coming to existence is a net harm because suffering is inevitable; therefore, we shouldn’t bring people into existence. For the anti-natalist’s, Suffering takes precedence over happiness. They hold that potential happy people will not miss being happy because they never existed in the first place. On the other hand, suffering …show more content…
This issue I find very significant because the positions mentioned will radically affect how we see bringing people unto existence and even more so, existence itself. With anti-natalism, existence will inherently be seen as meaningless. Anti-natalism can be seen as an extension of another view regarding the meaning of life since it basically holds that living in itself is enough for someone to want to or be conceived. Moreover, a child cannot be born for its own sake, and it puts out that life is pointless because of our inevitable suffering. It holds that no one should exist because there is no point in existing for we are merely puppets; we are self-conscious nothings, and our self-consciousness deceive us that we are something. There is no point in bringing more beings that are like this. Anti-natalism regards the creation of life to be meaningless, in a sense, nothing more than a selfish choice (parent wanting to pass on their knowledge and genes trying to be 'immortal' in a sense) or an effect of sexual …show more content…
I will first discuss its reliance on the asymmetry argument and the Utilitarian view of morality. Throughout his book, “Better Never to Have Been: the harm of coming into existence” (2006), we can see how he reiterated in different circumstances the “badness” of coming into existence. He says, “Each one of us was harmed by being brought into existence. That harm is not negligible, because the quality of even the best lives is very bad—and considerably worse than most people recognize it to be. Although it is obviously too late to prevent our own existence, it is not too late to prevent the existence of future possible people.” (Benatar, 2006,