The Dark Philosophy of Antinatalism - Alex O’Connor & Joe Folley

Antinatalism, particularly David Benatar's asymmetry argument, posits that life is not worth starting due to the inherent asymmetry between suffering and pleasure, where the avoidance of potential suffering holds greater moral weight than the potential for pleasure before existence.

• Benatar's antinatalism prioritizes avoiding potential suffering over gaining potential pleasure for non-existent beings.

• Procreation is seen as the non-consensual infliction of suffering on individuals who cannot consent to existence.

• Antinatalism posits life is not worth starting, but Benatar separates this from the decision to end an existing life.

David Benatar's antinatalist philosophy argues that bringing new life into existence is morally wrong due to an inherent asymmetry: potential pleasure for a non-existent being is irrelevant, while avoiding potential suffering is morally good. This perspective suggests that even if life contains some good, the non-consensual infliction of suffering outweighs any potential benefits. The philosophy also contends that most people underestimate the amount of suffering in their lives, attributing optimism to a 'Pollyanna principle' rather than an objective assessment.

Benatar's Asymmetry Argument

• 00:00:46 David Benatar's core argument for antinatalism revolves around an asymmetry between pleasure and pain before existence. He suggests that the potential pleasure a non-existent being might experience is irrelevant, but the potential pain they would avoid by not existing is a significant moral good. This is illustrated by thought experiments, such as not mourning the absence of pleasure on Mars but appreciating the absence of suffering.

The Moral Calculus of Existence

• 00:02:32 Once a person exists, pleasure is good and suffering is bad, but before existence, the moral calculus is different. For someone who doesn't exist, not experiencing pleasure is not a loss, but not experiencing suffering is a positive outcome. Therefore, from an antinatalist perspective, the only moral consideration before birth is the goodness of not suffering, leading to the conclusion that life should not be brought into existence.

Rights and Non-Consensual Suffering

• 00:03:01 Benatar extends his argument with a rights-based approach, comparing the non-consensual infliction of suffering. While it may be acceptable to cause suffering to prevent worse suffering (e.g., breaking an arm to save a life), it is not permissible to inflict suffering on an unconsenting individual with the promise of future good. Procreation, in this view, constitutes causing individuals to unconsensually experience suffering without their consent, a perspective that has even led to 'wrongful birth' lawsuits.

Antinatalism and Suicide

• 00:05:27 A common question for antinatalism is why it doesn't advocate for suicide if life is not worth living. Benatar likens life to a disappointing movie—one might regret coming but not leave halfway through. However, critics argue that if life is truly not worth starting, it should logically follow that it's not worth continuing, a point Benatar reportedly denies but which remains a point of contention among philosophers, touching upon the 'meaning of life' as whatever prevents one from ending it.