Is life worth coming? Does it mean that you can finish the race ahead of your task, despite the grief and the taste of life? Gustave Flaubert; because he did not want to convey the resentment and weight of existence to anybody, he could curse himself if he were a father. Fyodor Dostoyevsky used the expression "I will let you kill me in the womb" to become even more gloomy in the Karamazov Brothers.
Arthur Schopenhauer was particularly pessimistic in this regard:
"Children were brought into the world only because of an act, did the human race continue to exist? A person may prefer not to have much sympathy for the next generation in order to transfer the burden of existence or to impose it with cold blood before it is ever taken over. "
We can even find this view in the new international version of the Bible:
"Those who are dead, those who are already dead; I have reported that they are happier than those who are still alive. But the best of both are those who have never been born, those who have never seen the devil that has formed under the sun. "
In the period when global warming, nuclear war expectancies, separatist populist politicians are starting to rise, you welcome the anti-natalism that stands at this small but vibrant corner of the philosophy. David Benatari, one of the modern architects of this philosophy, may have invented or did not invent the concept of "anti-natalism" - he made an "intellectual excavation" to reach places and a selective committee is still debating it. He has recently been a guest in Sam Harris's "Waking Up Podcast" and has solidified in this long-argued opinion: Is life worth living? Benatar says no, at least for those who were never born.
Benatar, the author of the book "Better Never to Have Been" at Cape Town University, summarizes his philosophy: "Coming to the world is not just a disaster, but a very serious disaster." And it continues:
"We should not bring new people to life; but I think that this view is even more comprehensive, as we should not bring life-conscious people. It is not only a vision of being disastrous to exist, but it is also wrong to bring the world alive. "
Harris found a correlation with Buddhism. According to Sir Hari Singh Gour's translation of the Buddhist text, Buddha; that people are engaged in misbehavior; He claims that the cause of old age and death is existence. If people were aware of this phenomenon, they would quit immediately. This discourse is Buddha's; why he gave his name to Rahula, meaning "shackles" and "obstacles" to his own son. Of course, the child comes to Earth before going on to his legendary journey to Buddha, and on his name Rahula is selfishly preventing his father's quest for enlightenment.
The moral code is Buddhism; anti-natalizmin is as critical as its founding principles. Benatar; believes that there is a value asymmetry between good and bad things in life. When we think of the outer corners of the universe (which is the majority of this universe), we do not think that there may be no good there. But if we think about the fact that grief does not exist - for example on Mars; we can perceive this as a positive thing that nonexistent beings have escaped from pain. Benatar focuses more on this perception of the absence of suffering.
It's hard to die.
Harris; Benatar's observation; disastrous events directly contradict philosophers working on existential risk, including the idea that they can severely reduce or abolish the existence of the human population. Harris quotes Oxford philosopher William MacAskill; the biggest possible mistake is to do something that could put us at risk of suicide, like nuclear warfare. Because such a move; it closes all the doors to the unspoken truths that have existed after the universe and our constructive relationship that has been countless years. Harris believes that these hypothetical losses are equal to any suffering that may have been removed altogether.
Harris later; Benatar's "uncertainty sentiment" also refers to what it takes to create a "life worth living". Benatar; has kept the value of a continuation process different from a start with value. This lack of meaning is the lack; as it does not defend suicide, it makes it impossible to understand its main point. Regarding bringing others to life, in any case it should be much higher than the moment when the chatter of initiation is now.
If you are thinking about bringing someone to life, you do not only think about youth ages, but also think about their 80s. Parents; they do not think about the cancer that will harm the bodies of their future children after decades from their death.
Benatar will play a match you can not wait to see. You finally get an excursion ticket that will reveal that it is mediocre and you agree. Before; you did not think it was what you thought, you could not waste your time. Again, this is parallels with Buddhism, only you need to change in this respect; You do not need to take sponge in the past.
Harris continues to investigate the benefits. If you are not willing to try anyway, there is no telling how beautiful life can be. Cutting the lights of a cosmos that is a potential for beauty is no worse than bringing a living creature into the world that is all hell. We do not know how good life can be, at least with our current experience.
This is a particularly important question for Harris's belief, because we are designing artificial intelligence because we might be developing minds that suffer at the scales that we can never understand without even realizing. In ignorance, we could be creating hells in our computers.
Harris, of course, is seriously comprehended; but Benatar believes that the generations that will continue to suffer for thousands of years from now for a potential benefit will not be worthy of suffering at the moment. While Harris expresses that there are many potentials that are better than they exist, Benatar is simply; can not imagine the possibility of a better existence than that which never existed.
Two hour chat; it is refreshing and tiring as the same ground covers numerous similarities. But like the Buddhist debate traditions, these details are necessary. Anti-natalism is not a philosophy that can be summarized in an elevator speech; especially when taken into account, it is in contradiction to our most basic biological urge. Any family; when you say that your children should never have been born, a logical answer will not come.
Thankfully; With such an emotional subject expertly, the conversation never got hot. While Benatar has been working on this scene for decades, Harris has always been a logical debater. When Harris speaks of people born of their suffering - most people have passed on to the other side of the pain with unexpected behavioral and emotional benefits - Benatar acknowledges that our existence is changing the way we understand the truth. If you think that an experience enriches your life, it is not.
After all, though, this misery is still not worth it. Benatar will appeal to victims of rape. You will get this experience and help others with counseling and therapy, but can rape be so valuable as to cause frustration? This is a comparison of the larger problem of existence, where the living will continue to struggle, but if you ask Benatar, it is the most beneficial ever born.