diff options
author | Nicholas Johnson <nick@nicholasjohnson.ch> | 2023-10-15 00:00:00 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | Nicholas Johnson <nick@nicholasjohnson.ch> | 2023-10-15 00:00:00 +0000 |
commit | 10cd48c3e37deb2202d69e26bc0769965bb31e6a7f03b634462bbcc67520482d (patch) | |
tree | 85535dfb04329fc35350d0c8c394cd88371bd23dabda0cca8d8356db34728cb2 | |
parent | 46f2a2384861bdacdb0dc3a54c5eed3d452d3fe90d3fe4a2e60299776c1cec35 (diff) | |
download | journal-10cd48c3e37deb2202d69e26bc0769965bb31e6a7f03b634462bbcc67520482d.tar.gz journal-10cd48c3e37deb2202d69e26bc0769965bb31e6a7f03b634462bbcc67520482d.zip |
Fix typo
-rw-r--r-- | content/entry/antinatalism.md | 2 |
1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/content/entry/antinatalism.md b/content/entry/antinatalism.md index 14e0e14..ed45131 100644 --- a/content/entry/antinatalism.md +++ b/content/entry/antinatalism.md @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ According to Benatar, one way to arrive at antinatalism is through his asymmetry > Regarding procreation, the argument follows that coming into existence generates both good and bad experiences, pain and pleasure, whereas not coming into existence entails neither pain nor pleasure. The absence of pain is good, the absence of pleasure is not bad. Therefore, the ethical choice is weighed in favor of non-procreation. -Since I consider objective morality to be incoherent, I'm going to convert Benatar's asymmetry into the language hypothetical imperatives to make it more coherent. If you want more explanation on this, I recommend reading my post on [metaethics](/2020/10/11/metaethics/). I'm also going to make a few other modifications that he wouldn't object to which will make his argument easier to understand: +Since I consider objective morality to be incoherent, I'm going to convert Benatar's asymmetry into the language of hypothetical imperatives to make it more coherent. If you want more explanation on this, I recommend reading my post on [metaethics](/2020/10/11/metaethics/). I'm also going to make a few other modifications that he wouldn't object to which will make his argument easier to understand: 1. I value pain negatively 2. I value pleasure positively |