Antinatalism: Is it wrong to bring new sentient beings into existence?
Jordan B Peterson & David Benatar
A philosophical debate between Professor David Benatar, who argues for antinatalism, and Professor Jordan B Peterson, who opposes it, focusing on the moral, empirical, and existential implications of procreation.
The case is decided
It wasJordan B Peterson.
Jordan B Peterson defended 10 of 19 claims, while David Benatar defended 4 of 13. The balance of successfully defended claims across the debate favors Jordan B Peterson.
Score panel — adjudicator
Crowd verdict
1 voteThe model called this for Jordan B Peterson. Who do you say won?
Spread the verdict
Receipts attached. The link opens at the deciding moment.
David Benatar
Antinatalism is the view that it is wrong to bring new sentient beings into existence, supported by philanthropic and misanthropic arguments.
- Claims raised13
- Defended4
- Refuted4
- Unanswered4
- Concessions1
- Fallacies (weighted)0.4
Jordan B Peterson
While life involves suffering and malevolence, antinatalism is a flawed and dangerous conclusion that undermines the heroic potential of human existence.
- Claims raised19
- Defended10
- Refuted1
- Unanswered8
- Concessions1
- Fallacies (weighted)1.4
Definitional alignment
When the same word means two different things, the entire exchange becomes contestable. Below: every term where the debaters did not agree on a definition.
- antinatalismalignedDavid Benatar
The view that it is wrong to bring new sentient beings into existence, including humans, based on philanthropic (harm to the created being) and misanthropic (harm to others) arguments.
Jordan B PetersonA philosophical position that existence itself is a harm and should not be perpetuated, which Peterson argues is nihilistic and anti-human.
high
- asymmetry argumentnot alignedDavid Benatar
An axiological asymmetry where the absence of bad (e.g., pain) is good, but the absence of good (e.g., pleasure) is not bad, supporting antinatalism.
Jordan B PetersonA flawed arithmetic argument that presupposes a priori weighting of suffering over pleasure to justify antinatalism.
high
- bad/goodnot alignedDavid Benatar
Bad and good are broad categories encompassing pain/pleasure, knowledge/ignorance, desire satisfaction/thwarting, etc., with bad outweighing good empirically.
Jordan B PetersonBad and good are not reducible to arithmetic calculations; heroic modes of being can redeem existence despite suffering.
high
- hedonismnot alignedDavid Benatar
A view that reduces good/bad to pleasure/pain, which Benatar explicitly rejects in favor of broader accounts (e.g., desire satisfaction).
Jordan B PetersonThe implicit framework of Benatar's argument, where bad is equated with suffering and good with pleasure or desire satisfaction.
medium
Another case?
Try the next debate.