1467-9973/asset/META_left.gif?v=1&s=bbeacc067e710d8045b896b6f2734be9e1bf5d0b)
Article
The Owl and the Ostrich: Reply to Sami Pihlström on Ethical Unthinkabilities and Philosophical Seriousness
Article first published online: 17 OCT 2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9973.2011.01712.x
© 2011 The Author. Metaphilosophy © 2011 Metaphilosophy LLC and Blackwell Publishing Ltd
Additional Information
How to Cite
Benatar, D. (2011), The Owl and the Ostrich: Reply to Sami Pihlström on Ethical Unthinkabilities and Philosophical Seriousness. Metaphilosophy, 42: 605–616. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9973.2011.01712.x
Publication History
- Issue published online: 17 OCT 2011
- Article first published online: 17 OCT 2011
- Abstract
- Article
- References
- Cited By
Keywords:
- unthinkable ideas;
- dangerous views;
- philosophical seriousness;
- quality of life;
- anti-natalism
Abstract
Sami Pihlström argues in his “Ethical Unthinkabilities and Philosophical Seriousness” that there are some philosophical views that are so dangerous that we should not discuss them. He advances this argument with special reference to my (anti-natalist) view that being brought into existence is always a serious harm. In response I argue: (a) that there are major flaws in his argument for the conclusion that we should not think about (purportedly) unthinkable views; and (b) that my views about the harm of coming into existence are in any event neither unthinkable nor dangerous.