An Asymmetry in the Ethics of Procreation

Philosophy Compass 6 (11):765-776 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX


According to the Asymmetry, it is wrong to bring a miserable child into existence but permissible not to bring a happy child into existence. When it comes to procreation, we don’t have complete procreative liberty. But we do have some discretion. The Asymmetry seems highly intuitive. But a plausible account of the Asymmetry has been surprisingly difficult to provide, and it may well be that most moral philosophers – or at least most consequentialists – think that all reasonable efforts to provide such an account have by now been exhausted. In this paper, I argue that, despite the difficulties, the Asymmetry is too important to be set aside. I also note a handful of accounts of the Asymmetry that have been proposed and why they fail. It seems, for example, that it will not do to say that some people matter morally and others don’t, or that a person matters morally in some worlds but not others. My own conclusion is that, while we are bound to say all people matter morally – you, me and the merely possible – we are not bound to say that all their losses– or all ours– matter morally. We can instead distinguish between morally significant and insignificant losses, with the distinction between the two being a matter of where the loss is incurred in relation to the person who incurs it. This way of looking at things – which I call Variabilism– provides the basis for a plausible account of the Asymmetry. The availability of such an account suggests, I think, that our prospects for rescuing the Asymmetry are bright



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 80,119

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Antinatalism, Asymmetry, and an Ethic of Prima Facie Duties.Gerald Harrison - 2012 - South African Journal of Philosophy 31 (1):94-103.
The Asymmetry: A Solution.Melinda A. Roberts - 2011 - Theoria 77 (4):333-367.
Is supervenience asymmetric?John F. Post - 1999 - Manuscrito 22 (2):305-344.
Asymmetry and self-sacrifice.Theodore Sider - 1993 - Philosophical Studies 70 (2):117 - 132.
Sweet Gifts: A Jewish Response to Gilbert Meilaender.Elie Spitz - 2001 - Journal of Religious Ethics 29 (1):19 - 23.
Process causality and asymmetry.Phil Dowe - 1992 - Erkenntnis 37 (2):179-196.
Better Not to Have Children.Gerald K. Harrison & Julia Tanner - 2011 - Think, 10(27), 113-121 (27):113-121.
Understanding the Time‐Asymmetry of Radiation.Jill North - 2003 - Philosophy of Science 70 (5):1086-1097.


Added to PP

154 (#90,064)

6 months
12 (#94,927)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Melinda A. Roberts
The College of New Jersey

References found in this work

Reasons and Persons.Derek Parfit - 1984 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
Practical Ethics.Peter Singer - 1979 - New York: Cambridge University Press. Edited by Susan J. Armstrong & Richard George Botzler.
Weighing lives.John Broome - 2004 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Can we harm and benefit in creating?Elizabeth Harman - 2004 - Philosophical Perspectives 18 (1):89–113.
Future generations: Further problems.Derek Parfit - 1982 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 11 (2):113-172.

View all 21 references / Add more references