出版社: Oxford University Press
副标题: The Harm of Coming Into Existence
出版年: 2008-9-15
页数: 256
定价: USD 30.00
装帧: Paperback
ISBN: 9780199549269
内容简介 · · · · · ·
Most people believe that they were either benefited or at least not harmed by being brought into existence. Thus, if they ever do reflect on whether they should bring others into existence---rather than having children without even thinking about whether they should---they presume that they do them no harm. Better Never to Have Been challenges these assumptions. David Benatar a...
Most people believe that they were either benefited or at least not harmed by being brought into existence. Thus, if they ever do reflect on whether they should bring others into existence---rather than having children without even thinking about whether they should---they presume that they do them no harm. Better Never to Have Been challenges these assumptions. David Benatar argues that coming into existence is always a serious harm. Although the good things in one's life make one's life go better than it otherwise would have gone, one could not have been deprived by their absence if one had not existed. Those who never exist cannot be deprived. However, by coming into existence one does suffer quite serious harms that could not have befallen one had one not come into existence. Drawing on the relevant psychological literature, the author shows that there are a number of well-documented features of human psychology that explain why people systematically overestimate the quality of their lives and why they are thus resistant to the suggestion that they were seriously harmed by being brought into existence. The author then argues for the 'anti-natal' view---that it is always wrong to have children---and he shows that combining the anti-natal view with common pro-choice views about foetal moral status yield a 'pro-death' view about abortion (at the earlier stages of gestation). Anti-natalism also implies that it would be better if humanity became extinct. Although counter-intuitive for many, that implication is defended, not least by showing that it solves many conundrums of moral theory about population.
Better Never to Have Been的创作者
· · · · · ·
-
大卫·贝纳塔 作者
喜欢读"Better Never to Have Been"的人也喜欢 · · · · · ·
Better Never to Have Been的书评 · · · · · · ( 全部 8 条 )
> 更多书评 8篇
论坛 · · · · · ·
这本书有汉译版本吗? | 来自旁观者 | 4 回应 | 2023-06-19 17:31:10 |
请问各位是如何理解109页: grouding the right on ... | 来自超没用小羊 | 2020-06-14 05:42:58 |
这本书的其他版本 · · · · · · ( 全部3 )
-
游擊 (2023)暂无评分 16人读过
-
Oxford University Press (2006)暂无评分 4人读过
以下书单推荐 · · · · · · ( 全部 )
- 图书翻译市场失灵现象研究 (元非)
- *【哲学】 惊奇是大地之盐 (小马过河)
- psychology (Somer)
- 悲观主义者生活指南 (飘飘然)
- 世界史、纪实、传记、社会议题 (🐳 🐳)
谁读这本书? · · · · · ·
二手市场
· · · · · ·
- 在豆瓣转让 有1405人想读,手里有一本闲着?
订阅关于Better Never to Have Been的评论:
feed: rss 2.0
3 有用 No Name🇵🇸✊ 2019-11-09 22:11:56
前提-人生痛苦的必然性和必然负面性-就非常有问题,以及不存在的生命就不会有所失去-不存在恰恰失去了一切。
23 有用 水之南 2010-09-26 01:58:44
在功利主义内部论证:最好的事是从未出生。而且人有道德义务,不让孩子降生于世。很有趣,作者来过几天,一个很好玩的vegan。
1 有用 奥蒂安斯 2016-12-26 21:19:29
翻了一章不到……观点堪称惊世骇俗,但双重标准不能让人信服
28 有用 merleau 2016-02-03 20:53:14
整本书建立在最简单的范畴谬误的基础上:说不存在的的人是更快乐还是更痛苦就像说桌子是快乐还是痛苦一样可笑。better never to have wasted time on this book
5 有用 Enlightening 2021-08-29 19:44:30
虽说出生即伤害,但死亡同样糟糕。纽约客择今重发四年前访谈David Benatar的文章,即便不论其继承悲观主义传统的反出生论在当今及未来的影响力几何——疲惫于传教姿态的David显然并不在意这一点,它的许多论点也已经被支离破碎(或从未完整过)的人类文明反复证实。悲观主义并不使你消沉,它甚至与抑郁、创伤等其他个人经历或特质并无太大关系,只会让人对种种不真实或强颜欢笑的乐观论调感到厌倦,记者在访谈-... 虽说出生即伤害,但死亡同样糟糕。纽约客择今重发四年前访谈David Benatar的文章,即便不论其继承悲观主义传统的反出生论在当今及未来的影响力几何——疲惫于传教姿态的David显然并不在意这一点,它的许多论点也已经被支离破碎(或从未完整过)的人类文明反复证实。悲观主义并不使你消沉,它甚至与抑郁、创伤等其他个人经历或特质并无太大关系,只会让人对种种不真实或强颜欢笑的乐观论调感到厌倦,记者在访谈-成文的时间性体验中写下的文字是生动例证:八周后,在我们路过的地点,会(would)有一个29岁的驾驶卡车的男子撞死七个人。对David更生共鸣的是转发区一众没有读过文章的人的评论,“虚无主义将摧毁西方”“反出生论者崇拜自杀”......let's just go extinct. (展开)
0 有用 别辩经我害怕 2024-04-06 17:37:24 上海
我当然认同出生本身就是痛苦的最好别出生,但是这个论证过于滑稽。
0 有用 kookyobject 2024-03-30 12:12:45 美国
看完了Ch1+2,觉得是非常好的反出生主义导论!主要的论证思路是区分了actual objects的persistence问题和actual/possible objects的coming into existence问题,正确指出两者有完全不同的逻辑结构以及对应的形而上学问题域。但说实话这本书的论证经常像是伦理学家偷偷混入一些形而上学假设(比如对于modal metaphysics中的一些讨论非... 看完了Ch1+2,觉得是非常好的反出生主义导论!主要的论证思路是区分了actual objects的persistence问题和actual/possible objects的coming into existence问题,正确指出两者有完全不同的逻辑结构以及对应的形而上学问题域。但说实话这本书的论证经常像是伦理学家偷偷混入一些形而上学假设(比如对于modal metaphysics中的一些讨论非常简单粗暴,比如简单地假设possible objects以及actual future objects都不存在)。同为反出生主义者的形而上学小猫表示自己的工作受到了冒犯。。。(好吧其实我只是讨厌分析伦理学 (展开)
0 有用 阿荔散 2024-03-07 22:49:09 江苏
说得没错,也没什么对的就是了
0 有用 Heathcliff 2024-03-02 09:47:28 瑞典
支持
0 有用 momo 2024-01-22 04:14:51 美国
Is the difference between Healthy H and Sick S really analogous to the difference between never-existence and existence?