@book {82658, title = {生兒為人是何苦}, year = {2023}, month = {03/2023}, publisher = {游擊文化}, organization = {游擊文化}, abstract = {

出生在世永遠是嚴重的傷害
使人免受折磨的唯一方法,是自始就不要把人生下來

  「生命糟透了,沒被生下來還比較好。誰那麼幸運?萬中無一。」{\textemdash}{\textemdash}猶太妙語

  「一想到把某人帶到世上,就讓我不寒而慄{\textellipsis}{\textellipsis}願我的肉體澈底壞朽!願我永不會將活在世上的無聊和恥辱傳給任何人!」{\textemdash}{\textemdash}福樓拜

  「假使人是單憑純粹理性的行使,決定要不要生小孩,人類還會繼續存在嗎?」{\textemdash}{\textemdash}叔本華

本書為反生育主義的經典著作。大多數人認為,誕生於此世或繁衍後代是件好事,或至少並非傷害;然而南非哲學家大衛・貝納塔挑戰了這樣的預設,他透過「痛苦與愉悅的不對稱性」、「生命品質並非好事減壞事」等論點證明,出生在世永遠是嚴重的傷害。貝納塔也據此主張人類不應生育,以免製造無謂的痛苦。在他看來,透過自然滅絕達到「零」人口,才是道德正確的做法。

人存活於世,必然會經歷各種痛苦,如肉體上的飢餓、口渴、疲累、老化、病痛與死亡;精神上的焦慮、壓力、恐懼、悲痛、無聊、寂寞與絕望。貝納塔認為,雖然人們的生活品質有高有低,但客觀而言,所有人的人生其實都遠比自身所想像的更痛苦。生命的正面特質對在世的人固然好,仍舊沒辦法抵銷隨之而來的負面特質。快樂的事或許存在,然而痛苦與愉悅並不對稱。在道德上,避免痛苦的重要性遠大於獲得快樂,因此「自始不曾出生」(沒有痛苦也沒有快樂),無論如何都優於出生在世。貝納塔也提出相關的心理運作現象(如波麗安娜效應、適應及比較等)證明,人類對自己生命品質的主觀判斷並不可靠。人們傾向記住正面的經驗、抑制傷痛的記憶,並且美化過去,事實上,現實生活遠不如想像中美好,不論採取哪一種評估生命品質的觀點,生命都是壞事。

既然「出生即是受苦」,那麼預防痛苦最有效的方式,就是不再製造新的生命。貝納塔認為,生下有知覺的生命,會為新生命帶來龐大的苦難,而造成這種傷害是錯的,因此,讓人類及其他有知覺的生命自然滅絕,才是道德正確的做法。據此,人非但沒有生育的義務,更有不生小孩的道德義務。

在本書後半部,貝納塔解析了他的主張對生育、身障權利、受誤生命、人工和輔助生殖有何意涵,並就人工流產、人口及滅絕問題提出他的見解。最後,貝納塔回應了樂觀者及宗教人士提出的反駁,並考察了關於死亡與自殺的議題。

「〔貝納塔〕正是出於對人類的慈悲,不忍下一代蒙受生而為人的痛苦,才反對生育與希望人類消失,從而根絕一切人類的苦難。{\textellipsis}{\textellipsis}總括來說,本書立論新穎大膽,提出的議題亦十分重要。縱然論證層面上偶有簡略與失當之處,但其對常識與定見的挑戰,無疑值得深思。哪怕各位閱後不盡同意,相信也不會覺得枉然。畢竟哲學的可貴,並非給予答案,而在於有意義的發問。是次中文譯本面世,能讓華文世界的朋友以熟悉的語言一同思考此等重要課題,絕對是廣大讀者的佳音。」{\textemdash}{\textemdash}郭柏年(香港中文大學哲學系高級講師)

「在臺灣出版這本書,有其微妙和有趣之處。肯定會出現這樣的反應:『臺灣出生率夠低了!居然還出這種勸人不要生小孩的書。』不過,也許正是因為公眾都將注意力放在生育率上,反而更適合或需要反生論的觀點。{\textellipsis}{\textellipsis}好的哲學作品具備的價值往往包含諸多面向。本書提出發人深省的反生論主張,不僅提供讀者反思自身生命價值的素材,也深化了生命重大抉擇的考量。書中的議題,直搗我們身為人、出世、活著的核心意義,值得你我被此書挑戰和刺激一番。」{\textemdash}{\textemdash}林映彤(國立陽明交通大學心智哲學研究所副教授)

作者簡介

大衛{\textbullet}貝納塔(David Benatar)
南非開普敦大學哲學系教授,著有《人類的困境:生命終極問題的坦率指南》(The Human Predicament: A Candid Guide to Life{\textquoteright}s Biggest Questions)、合著有《生育辯論:生育是錯誤的嗎?》(Debating Procreation: Is it Wrong to Reproduce?)等書。

譯者簡介

李屹
elek,1986年生,高雄人。社會學出身。歡迎社科哲商管等翻譯合作。

}, isbn = {9786269573080}, author = {David Benatar} } @book {79899, title = {Better Never to Have Been : The Harm of Coming into Existence}, year = {2008}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, organization = {Oxford University Press}, abstract = {

Most people believe that they were either benefited or at least not harmed by being brought into existence. Thus, if they ever do reflect on whether they should bring others into existence--rather than having children without even thinking about whether they should--they presume that they do them no harm.

Better Never to Have Been challenges these assumptions. David Benatar argues that coming into existence is always a serious harm. Although the good things in one{\textquoteright}s life make one{\textquoteright}s life go better than it otherwise would have gone, one could not have been deprived by their absence if one had not existed. Those who never exist cannot be deprived. However, by coming into existence one does suffer quite serious harms that could not have befallen one had one not come into existence.

Drawing on the relevant psychological literature, the author shows that there are a number of well-documented features of human psychology that explain why people systematically overestimate the quality of their lives and why they are thus resistant to the suggestion that they were seriously harmed by being brought into existence. The author then argues for the {\textquoteright}anti-natal{\textquoteright} view--that it is always wrong to have children--and he shows that combining the anti-natal view with common pro-choice views about foetal moral status yield a {\textquoteright}pro-death{\textquoteright} view about abortion (at the earlier stages of gestation). Anti-natalism also implies that it would be better if humanity became extinct.

Although counter-intuitive for many, that implication is defended, not least by showing that it solves many conundrums of moral theory about population.

}, isbn = {9780199549269}, author = {David Benatar} }