Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Schopenhauer and anti-natalists like Benatar argue that existence itself imposes suffering whose avoidance through non-existence constitutes a positive good.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Pleasure, meaning, and flourishing are genuine goods that can outweigh suffering; existence enables their realization.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Non-existence is not a state one can experience as 'good'; comparing it favorably to existence involves category error.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Most people reflectively affirm their existence despite suffering, suggesting life's value exceeds its harms for most.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
All sentient beings experience pain, loss, and unfulfilled desires as inevitable features of conscious existence.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Non-existence involves no suffering, while existence guarantees exposure to suffering, making avoidance rational.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Creating new conscious beings imposes suffering upon them without their consent, which is ethically problematic.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.