Elias Muusavi published a defence of benatar's assymatry https://shorturl.at/juvAF (if you wish to read it) in it they said that the absence of pleasure is "not worse than the presence of pleasure" but does this really hold?. Also, are there any other counter arguments to the other various things proposed in this paper ie the claim that if a non existent being were to come into existence it would be harmful for them as they would suffer but not better for them to experience pleasure as if they continue not existing they would have no desire for pleasure hence it would be bad for them to come into existence, also would this view lead to pro mortalism?

Ps, I know this is a pretty long question or series of questions but I just have to know and I would greatly appreciate it if you would answer.

Benatar Asymmetry Pain Pleasure
Presence Bad Good
Absence Good (even if there is no one to enjoy it) Not bad (unless there's someone for whom this is a deprivation)
  • 1
    A non existent being is not a being and thus it is meaningless to state that something is good or bad. Sep 23 at 16:07
  • Though I edited in Benatar's Asymmetry into the question, I really can't tell what exactly is asymmetrical about the whole thing. Sep 24 at 6:47
  • Agent Smith, what is your opinion of the article? Sep 24 at 7:20


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .