Debating Procreation: Is It Wrong to Reproduce? (Debating Ethics),Used

Debating Procreation: Is It Wrong to Reproduce? (Debating Ethics),Used

In Stock
SKU: SONG0199333556
Brand: OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
Condition: Used
$22.21
Quantity
Add to wishlist
Add to compare
Sold by Ergodebooks, an authorized reseller.

Processing time: 1-3 days

US Orders Ships in: 3-5 days

International Orders Ships in: 8-12 days

Return Policy: 15-days return on defective items

Payment Option
Payment Methods

Help

If you have any questions, you are always welcome to contact us. We'll get back to you as soon as possible, withing 24 hours on weekdays.

Customer service

All questions about your order, return and delivery must be sent to our customer service team by e-mail at yourstore@yourdomain.com

Sale & Press

If you are interested in selling our products, need more information about our brand or wish to make a collaboration, please contact us at press@yourdomain.com

While procreation is ubiquitous, attention to the ethical issues involved in creating children is relatively rare. In Debating Procreation, David Benatar and David Wasserman take opposing views on this important question. David Benatar argues for the antinatalist view that it is always wrong to bring new people into existence. He argues that coming into existence is always a serious harm and that even if it were not always so, the risk of serious harm is sufficiently great to make procreation wrong. In addition to these 'philanthropic' arguments, he advances the 'misanthropic' one that because humans are so defective and cause vast amounts of harm, it is wrong to create more of them.David Wasserman defends procreation against the antinatalist challenge. He outlines a variety of moderate pronatalist positions, which all see procreation as often permissible but never required. After criticizing the main antinatalist arguments, he reviews those pronatalist positions. He argues that constraints on procreation are best understood in terms of the role morality of prospective parents, considers different views of that role morality, and argues for one that imposes only limited constraints based on the wellbeing of the future child. He then argues that the expected good of a future child and of the parentchild relationship can provide a strong justification for procreation in the face of expected adversities without giving individuals any moral reason to procreate

⚠️ WARNING (California Proposition 65):

This product may contain chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm.

For more information, please visit www.P65Warnings.ca.gov.

Recently Viewed