Negative utilitarianism applied to contraception therefore presupposes a repugnant conclusion-style comparison between existing and non-existing persons that negative utilitarianism itself lacks resources to adjudicate.
?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.
Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.
The view that an individual self-evidently ought to aim at the maximum balance of happiness for all sentient beings present and future, whatever the cost to herself; also called Universalistic Hedonism
negative utilitarianism(Proposed as a response to the counterintuitive implications of classic utilitarianism for population policy.)
The view that an act is morally wrong if and only if its consequences contain more pain or other disvalues than an available alternative, with no positive weight given to pleasures or other goods.
repugnant conclusion(Population ethics; critique of classical utilitarianism)
The counterintuitive result that a world with a very large number of individuals whose welfare levels are barely above zero could count as better than a world with a smaller number of very well-off individuals, given classical utilitarianism's sum-total criterion.
resources(Resource egalitarianism)
External material goods such as land and moveable property, and optionally personal traits or talents that function as instruments helping persons achieve their ends.