PL EN


2015 | 3 | 50-74
Article title

Nebýt či být? O zmatcích, které přináší asymetrický argument

Selected contents from this journal
Title variants
EN
Better Never to Have Been? The Confusions of the Asymmetry Argument
Languages of publication
CS
Abstracts
EN
This paper examines in detail David Benatar’s asymmetry argument for his thesis that it would have been better for all people not to have begun to exist. Confused attempts to construe the thesis itself are dismissed, including some by Benatar himself (1). A more fitting reading is proposed: in all people self-regret due to one’s own coming into existence would be adequate (2). Benatar’s basic asymmetry of harms and benefits is accepted as a mere truism (3). The lack of any articulate transition from the asymmetry to the thesis on Benatar’s side is exposed. Although the transition is reconstructed from hints provided by him, it is found wanting (4). Finally, the novelty of the asymmetry argument is highlighted.
Contributors
  • Studia theologica, redakce, Cyrilometodějská teologická fakulta Univerzity Palackého v Olomouci, Univerzitní 22, 771 11 Olomouc, Czech Republic, http://www.studiatheologica.eu
References
Document Type
Publication order reference
Identifiers
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.desklight-5eb86b48-8620-43e5-86ab-905bd17bfac5
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.