Benatar’s Anti-Natalism: Philosophically Flawed, Morally Dubious

Abstract In the first part of paper, I discuss Benatar’s asymmetry argument for claim that it would have been better each us to never lived at all. contrast other commentators, will argue there is a way interpreting premises his which makes all them come out true. (This require one departure from own presentation.) Once we see why are true, will, however, also realise trades on an ambiguity renders invalid. second consider whether discussions how best implement anti-natalist conclusion crosses moral barrier. ask can, independently any philosophical argument, raise legitimate objection end life earth. three views concerning role our pre-philosophical and attitudes in debates: external view according these set barriers content debate whilst themselves standing outside this debate; internal intuitions material reflection play no further role; intermediate pre-reflective attitudes, without requiring validation, can important when comes issues regarding implementation claims.