Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-10T05:34:45.313Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

BETTER NEVER TO HAVE BEEN BELIEVED: BENATAR ON THE HARM OF EXISTENCE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 January 2011

Campbell Brown
Campbell Brown*
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In Better Never to Have Been, David Benatar argues that existence is always a harm (Benatar 2006: 18–59). His argument, in brief, is that this follows from a theory of personal good which we ought to accept because it best explains several ‘asymmetries’. I shall argue here (a) that Benatar's theory suffers from a defect which was already widely known to afflict similar theories, and (b) that the main asymmetry he discusses is better explained in a way which allows that existence is often not a harm.

Type
Research Article
Information
Economics & Philosophy , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , March 2011 , pp. 45 - 52
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

For helpful discussions and comments on previous drafts I would like to thank Daniel Cohen, Toby Handfield and Yujin Nagasawa.

References

REFERENCES

Benatar, D. 2006. Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Binmore, K. and Voorhoeve, A.. 2003. Defending transitivity against Zeno's paradox. Philosophy and Public Affairs 31: 272–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broome, J. 1991. Weighing Goods. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Broome, J. 1994. The value of a person. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes 68: 167–185.Google Scholar
Broome, J. 2004. Weighing Lives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fehige, C. 1998. A pareto principle for possible people. In Preferences, ed. Fehige, C. and Wessels, U., 508–543. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parsons, J. 2003. Why the handicapped child case is hard. Philosophical Studies 112: 147–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rachels, S. 1998. Counterexamples to the transitivity of better than. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 76 (1): 71–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sen, A. 1997. Quasi-transitivity, rational choice, and collective decisions. In Choice, Welfare, and Measurement, 118–134. Harvard: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Temkin, L. S. 1996. A continuum argument for intransitivity. Philosophy and Public Affairs 25 (3): 175–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar