Free Republic

Singer explains Benatar’s antinatalist philosophy, which bases its moral framework by weighing the consequences of existence, in this way: “everyone will suffer to some extent, and if our species continues to reproduce, we can be sure that some future children will suffer severely. Hence continued reproduction will harm some children severely, and benefit none.” Singer then invites readers to engage in a thought experiment: "So why don’t we make ourselves the last generation on earth? If we would all agree to have ourselves sterilized then no sacrifices would be required — we could party our way into extinction!"

Peter Singer's June 6th essay for the New York Times about whether or not we should be the "last generation" to humans to live, suffer, and mess up the planet elicited much response (here is my post about it), and Singer has now responded to some of the responders. If nothing else, it confirms what his first essay demonstrated fairly well, despite its relative brevity: Singer's arguments are generally pedestrian and hollow, as well as sometimes incoherent. For example: The claims made by some readers that my essay reveals philosophers to be gloomy, depressed people are therefore wide of the...