Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Is human existence worth its consequent harm?

Len Doyal1

  • 1Queen Mary, University of London, 708 Willoughby House, The Barbican, London EC2Y 8BN, UK. l.doyal@qmul.ac.uk

Journal of Medical Ethics
|October 2, 2007
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

The covert recording of medico-legal consultations.

The Medico-legal journal·2018
Same author

Should the skeleton of "the Irish giant" be buried at sea?

BMJ (Clinical research ed.)·2011
Same author

Ethics, law, and the junior doctor.

Postgraduate medical journal·2010
Same author

The resuscitation game continues: what is really going on?

Postgraduate medical journal·2009
Same author

Clinical and moral uncertainty in psychiatry: the problem of scarce resources.

Postgraduate medical journal·2009
Same author

Moral and legal uncertainty within medicine: the role of clinical ethics committees.

Postgraduate medical journal·2009

It is argued that never being born is preferable due to life's inherent harms. While procreation may seem irresponsible, gambling on life's potential benefits for future generations is also rational.

Area of Science:

  • Philosophy of life
  • Ethics of procreation
  • Antinatalism

Background:

  • David Benatar posits that non-existence is preferable to existence due to unavoidable suffering.
  • He argues procreation, including via reproductive technology, is morally irresponsible.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically evaluate Benatar's antinatalist arguments.
  • To explore the ethical considerations of procreation and reproductive technologies.

Main Methods:

  • Philosophical argumentation and ethical analysis.
  • Critique of Benatar's claims on harm and non-existence.

Main Results:

  • Benatar's view that non-existence is harm-free is challenged.
  • The rationality of gambling on life's potential benefits versus guaranteed non-experience is introduced.

Related Experiment Videos

Conclusions:

  • Benatar's arguments may weaken the moral relevance of procreation decisions by dismissing the potential rationality of such gambles.
  • Foreseen harm remains a crucial factor in reproductive ethics.