Res Publica

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 145–157 | Cite as

A Defence of the Asymmetry in Population Ethics

Article

Abstract

A common intuition is that there is a moral difference between ‘making people happy’ and ‘making happy people.’ This intuition, often referred to as ‘the Asymmetry,’ has, however, been criticized on the grounds that it is incoherent. Why is there, for instance, not a corresponding difference between ‘making people unhappy’ and ‘making unhappy people’? I argue that the intuition faces several difficulties but that these can be met by introducing a certain kind of reason that is favouring but non-requiring. It is argued that there are structural similarities between the asymmetry and moral options and that the asymmetry can be defended as an instance of a moral option.

Keywords

Asymmetry Harm Benefit Procreation Reasons Options Supererogation Anti-natalism 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Many thanks to Kent Hurtig, Gustaf Arrhenius, Eric Carlson and an anonymous referee for their many helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper.

References

  1. Arrhenius, Gustaf. 2000. Future generations: A challenge for moral theory. Uppsala: University Printers.Google Scholar
  2. Benatar, David. 2006. Better never to have been: The harm of coming into existence. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Broome, John. 1999. Ethics out of economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Broome, John. 2004. Weighing lives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bykvist, Krister. 2007. The benefits of coming into existence. Philosophical Studies 135: 335–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hanser, Matthew. 1990. Harming future people. Philosophy and Public Affairs 19: 47–70.Google Scholar
  7. Harman, Elizabeth. 2004. Can we harm and benefit in creating? Philosophical Perspectives 18: 89–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Heyd, David. 1982. Supererogation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Heyd, David. 1994. Genethics: Moral issues in the creation of people. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  10. Holtug, Nils. 2001. On the value of coming into existence. The Journal of Ethics 5: 361–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kagan, Shelly. 1989. The limits of morality. New York: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  12. McMahan, Jeff. 1981. Problems of population theory. Ethics 92: 96–127.Google Scholar
  13. McMahan, Jeff. 2009. Asymmetries in the morality of causing people to exist. In Harming future persons, ed. Melinda Roberts and David Wasserman, 49–67. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Narveson, Jan. 1967. Utilitarianism and new generations. Mind 76: 62–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Narveson, Jan. 1973. Moral problems of population. The Monist 57: 62–86.Google Scholar
  16. Parfit, Derek. 1984. Reasons and persons. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Parsons, Josh. 2002. Axiological actualism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 80: 137–147.Google Scholar
  18. Persson, Ingemar. 2009. Rights and the asymmetry between creating good and bad lives. In Harming future persons, ed. Melinda Roberts and David Wasserman, 29–47. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Roberts, Melinda. 2003a. Can it ever be better never to have existed at all? Person-based consequentialism and a new repugnant conclusion. Journal of Applied Philosophy 20: 159–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Roberts, Melinda. 2003b. Is the person-affecting intuition paradoxical? Theory and Decision 55: 1–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Roberts, Melinda. 2010. Abortion and the moral significance of merely possible persons. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ross, David. 2002. The right and the good. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Shiffrin, Seana Valentine. 1999. Wrongful life, procreative responsibility, and the significance of harm. Legal Theory 5: 117–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Urmson, James. 1958. Saints and Heroes. In Essays in moral philosophy, ed. Melden, Abraham Irving, 198–216. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
  25. Woodward, James. 1986. The non-identity problem. Ethics 96: 804–831.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden
  2. 2.Filosofiska institutionenUppsala UniversitetUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations