Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Key_Revenue3922 t1_j1sgb7d wrote

David Benatar’s antinatalism

I have been listening to David Benatar a lot lately and have been reading in his books. Benatar is an antinatalist and argues that life is not worth living. I have engaged mostly in thinking about Benatars argument that the bad outweighs the good in life (by a large margin). This is what I would like to weigh in on. Benatar uses three measurements of human wellbeing (the three most established ones) and argues that by any of these standards the good outweigh the bad. These three alternative measurements of human wellbeing are: the objective lists theory, hedonism and desire theories. It is my understanding from what I have read that none of these theories are widely accepted. They all have their problems, which I choose not to get into.

Benatar goes through each one of them and “proves” that the negative comes out on top. As for hedonism, according to Benatar, there is more pain than pleasure in life (I think he says even in the best life). For example, there is such a thing as chronic pain, but there is no such thing as chronic pleasure. There is also a tendency for people to underestimate how bad their life is. They remember and anticipate positive things, something known as an optimism bias. In objective lists Benatar suggests that in anything we put on the list we always score pretty low. For example, if knowledge is on the list, there is always going to be way more that we don’t know. If a long life is on the list, well, he says, “a life of 80 years is much closer to zero than to a thousand”. In the desire fulfillment theory Benatar argues that there will always be more desires that we don’t fulfill then the once that we fulfill.

My problem with this is that the weighting system seems arbitrary. How do you measure pain versus pleasure in a human life? How do you know that the bliss of a person’s romantic escapade is outweighed by the pain they experience struggling with decease in later life? How do you know weather the pains of a frustrated career goal is outweighed by the happiness of great friendships? I don’t think you do. As for objective lists and knowledge I also think that it is only a relative truth that we know “little”. We know more than any other animal on the planet. There is an infinite amount of knowledge that a being could possess. Human beings place themselves somewhere on an infinite spectrum when is comes to the knowledge that they possess. It is only relatively “little” or relatively “a lot”. Benatar’s desire fulfillment argument I think can be rebutted in the same way as the objective lists argument. I am not even sure it is true that most of our desires remain unfulfilled. But my overall point about Benatar’s analysis about “the human predicament” as he calls it, is that the weighting system that he has set up is arbitrary. If you want to arrive at the conclusion that life is not worth living than you set up the weighting system in such a way so that the negative outweighs the positive or vice versa.

6

wolfe1jl t1_j1sqp4k wrote

One a desire is fulfilled we are ultimately unsatisfied by its fulfillment and either move the goal post by creating a new desire to fulfill or attempt to repeat fulfillment process. Both create a hamster wheel for us to run both lewd to the experience of some pain. IMO antinatalism works if someone accepts that the whole of who they are are just there desires and behaviors and cant exercise control over these things. It also falls apart if we view pain as just something bad or to be avoid and not merely as an unavoidable human experience that is universal. Pain appears to me as neutral because the pain being experienced must always be made relative to the one experiencing it, as it could be good if it eliciting beneficial changes and growth. But perhaps if we view pain as the best way to learn something (fear learning) it may actually be good if viewed this way.

1

Key_Revenue3922 t1_j1togi8 wrote

>Pain appears to me as neutral because the pain being experienced must always be made relative to the one experiencing it, as it could be good if it eliciting beneficial changes and growth.

Thanks for your reply. Benatar addresses this point and he says that even if pain has instrumental value, because it can lead to positive change, it is still pain. He is interested in weather the totality of pain or pleasure is more in the course of the whole life.

It seems from your reply that you have arrived at the conclusion that there is more pain than pleasure in life. How did you arrive at that conclusion.

1

wolfe1jl t1_j1tvg7x wrote

Interesting. Well I came to this conclusion by thinking on what pain is. Pain has a dualistic quality to it consisting of physical and psychological aspects. It’s by this dualistic natural that I conclude it must be the only truly universal experience meaning that humans can always recognize physical or psychological pain across cultures. From this point the only other thing that has a dualistic universal quality to it that I could think of was light. Once I started to correlate the two idea of pain and light I began to understand that pain shouldn’t always be avoided and is a necessary part of our universe as it could be a source energy or entropy from the change and growth process or something else. But I realized it is indeed universal and it’s due to pains intrinsic qualities that there will be more pain then pleasure, but pain being more abundant then pleasure also makes sense if the of goal of this place is the accumulation of wisdom via the application of having experiences and adding those experiences to knowledge. Which I believe can’t be achieved without a first person perspective. Hope that was at all understandable of how I arrived to my position. I assumed antinatalism was a a bleak out look of what the universe is where I would say my outlook is not that at all even though it appears I have arrived at very similar conclusions.

1