The most famous argument for anti-natalism is David Benatars asymmetry argument, which argues that the impossibility of a lived life being better than never existing leads us to the conlusion that having children is morally wrong. In this essay I discuss an alternative route to reach the same conclusion. My argument is inspired by Seana Shiffrins consent-based argument and is an alternative to Erik Magnussons risk-based argument. After discussing ways to avoid common objections to the asymmetry argument I proceed to argue whether my risk based argument stands up to an array of hypothetical counterarguments
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:umu-197416 |
| Date | January 2022 |
| Creators | Lind, Carl |
| Publisher | Umeå universitet, Institutionen för idé- och samhällsstudier |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0021 seconds