An Evaluation of David Benatar Notion On Human Predicament

AN EVALUATION OF DAVID BENATAR’S NOTION OF THE HUMAN
PREDICAMENT
BY
UWAGBALE COLLINS IZIEGBE
Matric Number: ART1813428
BEING AN ESSAY SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY,
ST. ALBERT THE GREAT MAJOR SEMINARY, IDOWU-OFFONRAN, IN
AFFILIATION WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF BENIN, BENIN CITY, IN
PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF
BACHELOR OF ARTS DEGREE IN PHILOSOPHY
IDOWU-OFFONRAN
JUNE, 2022.
CERTIFICATION
This is to certify that the Essay titled: AN EVALUATION OF DAVID BENATAR’S
NOTION OF THE HUMAN PREDICAMENT, submitted to the Department of
Philosophy, St. Albert the Great Major Seminary, Idowu-Offonran, in affiliation with the
University of Benin, Benin City, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award
of Bachelor of Philosophy, is a record of original research carried out by me: Collins
Iziegbe UWAGBALE
______________________ __________________________
Date Collins Iziegbe UWAGBALE
_______________________ __________________________
Date Moderator,
Very Rev. Fr. Peter Egbe Ph.D.,
Head of Philosophy Department
St. Albert the Great
Major Seminary,
Idowu-Offonran.
DEDICATION
This essay is dedicated to those who are suffering, struggling against difficulties, with
their lips constantly pressed against life’s bitter cup.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am grateful to God Almighty, who always leads us in the triumphant following
of Christ, whose suffering was vicarious and meant to liberate us, albeit the apparent
challenges and trials of human life. I am indeed grateful to the Blessed Virgin Mary,
(mater dolorosa) on whose constant intercession we rely for unfailing help in whatever
conditions of life.
I solemnly express my unquantifiable sentiment of gratitude to my ArchBishop;
Most Rev. Dr. Augustine Obiora Akubeze. My vocations Director; Rev Fr. Pascal
Omono and the entire vocations team. In a special way I thank my Parish Priest; Very
Rev. Fr. Edwin Omorogbe for his fatherly care and support.
I am grateful to the Rector, Very Rev. Fr. Dr. Anselm Ekhelar, The Head of
Department of Philosophy and my moderator; Very Rev. Fr. Peter Egbe and to the entire
team of Formators and lecturers who have contributed greatly to my personality and
growth. I am also grateful for the atmosphere of free inquiry here at St. Albert the Great
Major Seminary.
My candid appreciation and indebtedness go to my dear and lovely Parents Mr.
and Mrs Peter Uwagbale (KSM) and my Siblings; Frank, Kelvin and Jeffrey Uwagbale
whose companionship have taught me the values of happiness and commitment. Many
parents and siblings have done great things but you surpass them all, you are all
impeccably unique. Finally, to all my friends and classmates special thanks to you all.
Collins Iziegbe UWAGBALE

JUNE, 2022.
ABSTRACT
The human predicament is an assessment of the existential condition of man. It is an

honest look at life bringing to light, the questions; what is man? the meaning of his life?
amidst, the fact of suffering, human limitation and the inevitability of death. The Greek
tragedian; Sophocles while reflecting on the existential condition of man, described man
as a “chained Prometheus”. In western classical tradition, Prometheus is as a figure
representing human striving, suffering and subjection to malevolence. Sophocles’
conception of man as a chained Prometheus posits that just as Prometheus was held in
bondage so is humankind constrained to the same fate, an incessant bondage to which
man is helpless. It is this helpless condition of man that David Benatar says is accurately
described as the “human predicament”. The human condition, he says is a tragic
predicament from which none of us can escape. To remedy the problem, Benatar thinks
that the predicament is predicated on the fact of human existence, since existence
inevitably leads to suffering. Thus, to put an end to the predicament he adopts the anti-
natalist position which regards procreation as morally indefensible because it produces
“centers of suffering”. This essay therefore, seeks to evaluate Benatar’s position,
employing the historical method, expository, comparative and evaluative methodologies.
The major objective of this essay is to assess the existential condition of human life and
attempt a realistic view of human life.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page ………………………….……………...…….……….……………….. i
Certification Page ……………….…………….……………………….………… ii
Dedication …………………………. ………….………………………………… iii
Acknowledgements …………………………………….………………….…….. iv
Abstract ………………………………………………….…………………….…. v
Table of Contents …………………………………….………………………….. vi
CHAPTER ONE
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1.1 Statement of problem ………………………………………………………… 1
1.2 Background of study …………………………………………………………. 1
1.3 Aim and objectives …………………………………………………………. 2
1.4 Relevance of study …………………………………………………………… 2
1.5 Scope of study ……………………………………………………………….. 3
1.6 Methodology …………………………………………………………………. 3
1.7 Clarification of term …………………………………………………………. 4
1.7.1 Man ………………………………………………………………………. 4
1.7.2 Optimism ……………………………………………………….………… 4
1.7.3 Pessimism ………………………………………………………………… 5
1.7.4 Predicament ………………………………………………..…...……...… 5
1.8 Life and works of David Benatar …………………………………………...... 6

CHAPTER TWO
PHILOSOPHERS VIEW ON THE HUMAN PREDICAMENT
2.1 Hegesias of Cyrene …………………………………………………………... 7
2.2 Siddartha Gautama (Buddha) ………………………………………………… 8
2.3 Augustine ……………………………………………………………………. 9
2.4 Blaise Pascal …………………………………………………………………. 11
2.5 Arthur Schopenhauer ………………………………………………………… 13
2.6 Existentialism ………………………………………………….……….……. 14
2.7 Joseph Omoregbe ……………………..………………………………..……. 17
CHAPTER THREE
DAVID BENATAR’S NOTION OF THE HUMAN PREDICAMENT
3.1 Meaning of life ……………………………………………………………….. 19
3.1.1 Meaning Sub Specie Hominis ……………………………………………… 20
3.1.2 Meaning Sub Specie Communitatis ………………………………………... 21
3.1.3 Meaning Sub Specie Humanitatis …………………………………………. 21
3.2 Meaninglessness of life ……………………………………………………… 22
3.3 Quality of life ………………………………………………………………… 24
3.4 Death ………………………………………………………….…………….... 27
3.5 Suicide ……………………………………………………………………….. 29
3.6 Immortality …………………………………………………………………... 30
3.7 Anti-Natalism ………………………………………………………………... 32

CHAPTER FOUR
EVALUATION AND CONCLUSION
4.1 Arguments in support ………………………………….……………..……… 36
4.2 Arguments Against ………………………………….……………………….. 40
4.3 Assessment of the quality of human life in Nigeria …….……….…………… 46
4.4 Conclusion …………………………….……….……….……………….….… 48
BIBLIOGRAPHY ………………………………………………………………. 52
CHAPTER ONE
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
1.1 Statement of problem
The problem examined in this explorative study ranges from the complex issues
surrounding man’s existence, from the time of his birth to the time he eventually dies.
The question; whether life has an intrinsic meaning does not feature as a great concern
in common parlance. It only seems to be a relevant discourse among philosophers and
thinkers. This study therefore evokes a certain kind of consciousness to confront the
following questions; what is life all about? Do our lives have meaning? Is life worth
living? How should we respond to the fact that we are going to die? How do we respond
to the fact of suffering and the poor quality of life? Ultimately, why do we exist rather
than not existing.1 Without answers to these questions, we remain restless and perplexed.
It is on this basis that this study becomes highly relevant.
1.2 Background of study
A deep reflection on our human experiences spurs us to contemplate on the
vicissitudes and complexities of life. My experience, therefore, forms the background for
this research. One bright morning, on my way to the Church, there was a long congestion
of vehicles, I had even complained that I would be late, not knowing that I was about to
have a near death experience. An inattentive driver lost control of his car which executed
a counter clockwise turn ending with about four other vehicles falling off the road
1
Cf. Adolf Grunbaum, Why is There a World at All, Rather Than Just Nothing? University of Pittsburgh
Ontology Studies 9. 2009, p. 8
including our vehicle. I watched helplessly as our vehicle somersaulted. In my heart, I
questioned; what is this all about? Am I going to die? I was shaken with bruises on my
body and had a bad ankle sprain.
From my experience, a few of us may have come close to dying long before we
do eventually die; we confront the finitude of our lives. It is this finitude that conveys the
message of our predicament. We did not choose to be here, we found ourselves in the
world and then we die, David Benatar puts this point clearly when he says that;
We are born, we live, we suffer along the way and

then we die obliterated for the rest of eternity. The
human condition is in fact a tragic predicament
from which none of us can escape, for the
predicament consists not merely in life but also in
death.2
In all of these, philosophy becomes a product of man’s experience which spurs
him to search for meaning and answers to questions about himself and all that constitutes
his existence.
1.3 Aim and Objective
This academic research is primarily aimed at assessing the existential condition
of human life and bringing to light the question of the meaning of human life.
1.4 Relevance of Study
A discourse on the Human Predicament evokes the consciousness of oneself in
the world; it is not an abstract inquiry but an existential one. It is primarily relevant
because first and foremost it concerns man; it removes the veil of indifference and pushes
2
David Benatar, The Human Predicament: A Candid Guide to Life’s Biggest Question, Oxford University
Press, 2017, p. xi
man to identify his place in the universe and his ultimate destiny, then his hitherto
unanswered questions become clear.
1.5 Scope of Study
A variety of scholars have grappled with several existential questions as they
concern man. However, this academic research shall focus on Benatar’s view on human
existence and condition and his anti-natalist solution to the problem. To properly
articulate these views, this essay shall be divided into four chapters:
The first chapter aims at presenting a lucid introduction of the work which reveals
the problem that makes up the essay, the background for the essay, the aims and
objectives of the research, the relevance of the essay, its scope, methodology, the
clarification of basic terms and the biography of David Benatar.
The second chapter deals with the historical survey of various philosophers view
on the condition of human life, which makes up the human predicament. The third
chapter shall focus on a candid presentation of David Benatar’s notion of the human
predicament.
Finally, the fourth chapter is an evaluation of Benatar’s discourse, bringing to
light the implications of his views, also pointing out the supporting arguments of his
position and the arguments against his position. Attempting also to look at Benatar’s
view and their imports or bearings on the Nigerian experience of the quality of life.
1.6 Methodology
The method adopted in this research, shall be historical, expository, critical,
comparative and evaluative. By historical, I mean that we shall have recourse to the
conceptions and views of other philosophers across the periods. By comparative, I mean
that this study shall appreciate not only western thought on the issue of man’s existence
but also enjoy the imports of oriental thought as well as African thought.
1.7 Clarification of terms
1.7.1 Man
Man is a member of the human race, a bipedal primate mammal, distinguished
from other mammals by notable development of the brain with a resultant capacity for
articulate speech and abstract reasoning.3 Beyond this, Man is a living being by
definition, he is a composite being made up of both body and soul. According to Plato
the soul is something divine in man, it is immortal, immaterial or spiritual. Its union with
the body is purely accidental; it formerly existed without a body and will continue to
exist after its separation from the body at death.4
The encyclopaedic genius, Aristotle conceives man as a rational animal. Aristotle
insists that man is different from other beings not because man has a body, (other
minerals, plants, and animals have bodies) but because man has a mind hence the reason
why he is capable of rational thinking.5
1.7.2 Optimism
Optimism is a doctrine which states that the goods of life, overbalance the pain
and evil of it and that life is preponderantly good. It is also a doctrine that this world is
the best possible world based on the argument that God being all wise must know all
3
Merriam Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of the English Language unabridged, Philip
Babcock Gove (ed) USA, Springfield, Massachusetts. 1981, p. 1369
4
Joseph Omoregbe, Knowing Philosophy: A General Introduction, Lagos: Joja Educational Research and
publisher Ltd., 1990, p. 99
5
Jirah Merizz M., What is Man, AB Philosophy, University of the Philippines, 2021, p.2
possible worlds, being all powerful must be able to create which so ever he might choose
and being all good (as it conceivably could be), must choose the best.6
1.7.3 Pessimism
Pessimism is an inclination to put the least favourable construction on actions and
happenings, to emphasize adverse aspects, conditions and possibilities, or to anticipate
the worst possible outcome. It is also the philosophical doctrine or opinion that reality is
essentially evil, completely evil as it conceivably can be. As a doctrine it states that the
evils of life overbalance the happiness it affords and life is preponderantly evil.7
1.7.4 Predicament
Predicament is a situation, especially an unpleasant, troublesome, or trying one
from which extrication is difficult.8 In such a situation we become acutely aware that we
do not know what to do, it is like being thrust onto a stage without a script. By their
nature, predicaments are disruptive, we are encapsulated and submerged by them and we
are forced to grapple with a set of emerging circumstances that we neither want nor
anticipate.
Being in predicament is like being “in” a corner, a pickle, or a tight spot, words
that suggest being stuck, caught, or trapped. We want to get out of it; it’s awkward,
uncomfortable disconcerting. Predicaments are filled with agitation and restless
6
Merriam Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of the English Language unabridged, Philip
Babcock Gove (ed) USA, Springfield, Massachusetts. 1981, p.1584
7
Merriam Webster’s Third New International Dictionary ibid., p. 1689
8
William Collins (ed)., what is predicament, http://dictionary.com/what-is-predicament/dictionary.com.
Accessed 2/8/2021
questioning and speculation: what is going to happen now? How will I ever get out of
this? Why is this happening to me?9
1.8 Life and works of David Benatar
David Benatar was born on the 8th of December 1966, he hails from South Africa.
A professor of philosophy and head of department of philosophy at the University of
Cape Town. He is best known for his advocacy of anti-natalism in his book Better Never
to have Been: the harms of coming to existence, in which he argues that coming into
existence is a serious harm regardless of his feelings of the existing being once brought
into existence, and that, as a consequence, it is always morally wrong to create more
sentient beings.10
His most recent book describes what he calls “the human predicament”: once one
exists, life will be bad, but death is often worse. Thus, existence inevitably leads to
suffering. Benatar suggests that a pessimistic perspective on human existence is more
realistic and appropriate than an optimistic perspective. Throughout the ‘Human
predicament’, his anti-natalist perspective is enriched and corroborated. Benatar does not
leave the human predicament without a clear suggestion for how we as individuals might
best respond to it. Do not procreate he says and whether or not we adopt this response,
human extinction is inevitable and all instances of terrestrial meaning will eventually
disappear.11
9
Terrie L. Thompson, Finding Ourselves in a Predicament: Now What Do I Do? University of Alberta,
Phenomenology and practice, volume1, 2007, pp. 105-109
10
People pill, biography of David Benatar, http://people pill.com/amp/people/who is david-benatar
accessed 6/9/2021
11
Rachel M. James et al., A Review of David Benatar, The Human Predicament: A Candid Guide to Life’s
Biggest Question, Springer International Publishing AG, published online, 2018.
http://doi.org/10.10007/s40806-018-0146-8.
CHAPTER TWO
PHILOSOPHERS’ VIEW ON THE HUMAN PREDICAMENT
While searching for answers to Man’s perplexing and existential questions, one
cannot avoid recourse to the tradition of thinkers and philosophers, who have already
dealt with similar problems. It is good to familiarize ourselves with them, because they
can be helpful in our personal reflection. As we explore the different views of
philosophers on the subject matter, it important to note that the term “Human
predicament” is not explicitly used by these philosophers but ideas that constitute a
discourse on the human predicament outlined by David Benatar are to a great extent seen
in the thoughts and works of the following philosophers amongst others.
2.1 Hegesias of Cyrene
Hegesias of Cyrene, also known as Peisthanatos (death persuader) argued that
happiness was unattainable, life was not worth living and death was better than life.12
Little is known about Hegesias’s life and writings; we can however estimate that he
flourished anytime around 290 BCE.13 According to the Roman orator Cicero (106-43),
Hegesias book called “Death by Starvation or the Death Persuader” was essentially an
argument for why everyone should just give up on life and all kill themselves. The book
starts out with a man who decides the he is going to starve himself to death. All his friends
came to him and try to talk him out of it. The man responds by arguing that happiness is
12
Kesebir Pelin., Scientific Answers to the Timeless Philosophical Question of Happiness. In E. Diener et
al (eds) Handbook of wellbeing. Salk Lake City, 2018, p.3
13
Cf Dorandi Tiziano, The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
1999, p.47
impossible and that it is much better to die than to live. He then proceeds to give a lengthy
dissertation on the miseries and torments of life.14
Hegesias states that since the body has been filled with many sufferings and the
soul suffers along with the body and is troubled and fortune prevents many things we
hope for. For these reasons, happiness is non-existent. He agrees with Crates that
suffering preponderates over pleasure, that happiness is unattainable.15 Hegesias of
Cyrene concludes that life contains more pain than pleasure; therefore, the only logical
outcome is suicide. “The preacher of death” argued his view point so well, according to
Cicero, that a wave of suicides took place in Alexandria and Ptolemy II had to banish
Hegesias from the land.16
Hegesias of Cyrene takes a pessimistic approach in evaluating the human
condition, that happiness cannot be attained and life is not worth living. Then he says
that a logical solution or the way out of the human predicament, is suicide.
2.2 Buddha (Siddartha Gautama)
Siddartha Gautama popularly known as Buddha (the enlightened one) was born
around 560 B.C and was brought up in the luxury of a royal court, Gautama was shocked
about the reality of human suffering outside the luxury of the palace. 17 According to
Buddha, there are three characteristics or marks of existence namely impermanence
14
Spencer Daniel, http://tales of times forgotten.com/2017/05/23, the-most-depressing-book-ever-written,
death-by-starvation-by-hegesias-of-kyrene. Accessed 06/12/2021
15
Kurt Lanpe, The Birth of Hedonism, The Cyrenaic Philosophers and Pleasure as a way of Life. Princeton
University press. 2015, p. 122-123
16
Kalman J. Kaplan, Biblical Versus Greek Narratives for Suicide Prevention and Life Promotion:
Releasing Hope from Pandora’s Urn, University of Illinois, Chicago. 2021, p.4
17
(anicca), non-self (anatta) and suffering (duhkha).18 Among these three marks of
existence “duhkha relates more to the human predicament. Duhkha means suffering or
pain which could be physical or mental suffering.19
After much reflection Gautama became enlightened and claimed to have
discovered the truth about human suffering which he calls the four noble truths. The first
is the fact that there is suffering all over the world, the second truth is about the cause of
this universal suffering, the third truth is the fact that suffering can be stopped and the
fourth truth is about how to put an end to suffering.20 The suffering in the world is caused
by some conditions, which ultimately lead to ignorance and suffering ceases when these
conditions are removed. Buddha tells us that to control these conditions we must follow
the “eight-fold noble path” which is characterized by; right views, right determination,
right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right endeavour, right mindfulness and right
concentration. These steps remove ignorance and desire, enlighten the mind and bring
perfect tranquillity, misery ceases, rebirth stops and the state of perfection is attained
(nirvana)21
2.3 Augustine
Augustine is a prominent figure in the medieval history of philosophy. He was
raised in Roman North Africa, born at Tagaste on November 13th, A.D 354. He is a great
18
Steven Collins, Nirvana and Other Buddhist Felicities. Cambridge University Press. 1998 p. 140.
19
Cf. Peter Harvey et al, (ed.). A Companion to Buddhist Philosophy. John Wiley & Sons. 2015 pp. 26–
31.
20
21
Maurice M. Makumba, Introduction to Philosophy, Paulines Publication Africa, Kolbe press: Kenya.
2005, p. 184
figure to both Christianity and in the history of western thought, with so many works
including his confession, the city of God and others.22
In the face of the dark descriptions of the human condition, Augustine holds up
philosophy or at least “the true philosophy; Christianity” as the sole defence against the
miseries of human life.23 Augustine gives his explanation for the evils of the human
condition stating that, there was a time when life was not filled with affliction and trouble
as it is now, but sin caused a fall from the ideal condition into one of permanent damage;
namely the human predicament. Thus, the effect of that sin was to subject human nature
to all the process of decay which we see and feel and consequently to death too.24
Augustine insists that this life is a vale of tears, where we must wait in hope for
a better life, while only loving things in so far as they relate to God.25 Augustine’s
contention is that God is the only resting place for the human soul and that God is the
only reality to satisfy the ultimate human desire for happiness. 26 The problem we face
according to Augustine, is that ever since the disobedience of the first man and woman,
Adam and Eve, every area of human life has been infected and corrupted by sin.27
In relating to the human predicament, the themes of man’s restlessness and his
suffering from so much evil is richly discussed in the work of Augustine. Augustine faced
22
Cf. Fredrick Copleston, A History of Philosophy: Medieval Philosophy, vol II, New York: Double day,
1962 p.68
23
Samantha E. Thompson, Augustine on Suffering and Order: Punishment in Context, university of
Toronto, 2010, p.1
24
Cf. Samantha E. Thompson, ibid., pp. 2-22
25
Cf. Caleb Cohoe, What Does the Happy Life Require? Augustine on What the Summum Bonum Include,
Forthcoming in Oxford Studies in Medical Philosophy. 2020, pp. 4-10
26
Samantha E. Thompson, ibid., p. 97-98
27
William F. Lawhead, Voyage of Discovery: A Historical Introduction to Philosophy, university of
Mississipi, 2002, p. 124-125
the problem of evil as squarely and searchingly as anyone could possibly do. To him evil
is something entirely negative in its nature. Evil is the lack of being, essence or nature.
Evil has its origin in the nothingness out of which God created everything, thus evil is
lapsing back into nothingness.28
Man’s restlessness is at the heart of the human predicament and we confront this
by recognizing that God made us and we would remain restless in our quest for meaning
until we rest in him. Augustine expresses this in the confessions when he says “Thou
awakes us to delight in thy praise; for thou madest us for thyself and our heart is restless
until it reposes in thee.”29 For Augustine therefore, the human predicament is as a result
of man abandoning God through sin and that we continue to be restless and remain in
this tragic condition until we find rest in God. Thus, the way out of the human
predicament is to turn to God whom we have abandoned.
2.4 Blaise Pascal
Born in 1623 in France, Blaise Pascal was primarily a Christian apologist, his
main concern was to defend the doctrines of Christianity especially in regard to man, his
weakness and need for a supernatural salvation. In his analysis of human nature, Pascal
sees man as a weak corrupt and miserable creature dominated by self-love and unable to
save himself from his predicament.30
According to Pascal, the goal of all men is happiness and the motivation for all
men’s action is to achieve this end. Yet no man according to Pascal, has the ability to
28
Faris D. Whitesell, The Problem of Evil as Treated by St. Augustine. Loyola university Chicago, 1939,
pp. 33-37
29
Coradella Collegiat Bookshelf (ed)., St. Augustine, The Confessions, 2004, p.1
30
Joseph Omoregbe, Modern Philosophy: A Simplified History of Western Philosophy, university of
Lagos, Joja Educational Research and Publishers Ltd. 1991, p. 19-20
reach this goal through his own efforts. The source of man’s unhappy condition is
awareness of his own suffering, awareness of the evil of human nature, which makes him
so miserable that once he is conscious of it nothing can console him.31
Pascal’s conception of man highlights his impending predicament, he sees man
as weak and miserable, he says, “what a chimera, then is man! What a novelty, what a
monster, what a bundle of contradiction, what a prodigy! Judge of all things, imbecile
worm of the earth, depositary of truth, a sink of uncertainty and error; the pride and refuse
of the universe! He is great, but at the same time miserable”.32
Expressing his thought on the human predicament, Pascal says “when I see the
blind and wretched state of man, when I survey the whole of the universe in its dumbness
and man left to himself with no light, as though lost in this corner of the universe without
knowing who put him there, what will become of him when he dies, incapable of
knowing anything”.33 Pascal uses the doctrine of the fall which is due to sin to persuade
us to seek in Christianity a way out of human predicament. For Pascal, our lives are futile
and absurd, if we reflect, we are aware that our activities bring no lasting contentment
and that the cosmos gives no meaning to our lives. This he would say is the unhappiness
of human beings without God.34
Pascal does not leave us without a solution or remedy to the human predicament,
for he says Who can help Man? Who can save him from this wretched condition and
31
Eugene E. Wilcox, Human Limitations in Pascal’s Pensees, The Kansas State Teachers College of
Emporia, United State of America, 1968, pp. 47-49
32
Cf. Blaise Pascal, Pensees, Translated by W.F Trotter, Christian Classics Ethereal Library Publishers,
1660, pp. 61-69
33
Cf. Stanley Rosen, The Philosopher’s Handbook, Essential Readings from Plato to Kant, Random House
New York, 2000, p. 156
34
Blaise Pascal, Pensees, 1660, p.126
restore him to his former dignity? It is only God who can do that, it is God alone who
can satisfy the human fundamental desire. Man, therefore needs God; without God he
remains wretched.35
2.5 Arthur Schopenhauer
Born in 1788, studied philosophy at the university of Gottigen, In the philosophy
of Schopenhauer, German idealism took a new turn. Schopenhauer’s Idealism is mainly
contained in his major work The World as Will and Idea. Here, he characterizes the
phenomenal world as a product of blind noumenal will.36 The world for Schopenhauer is
an idea or a representation of the will to live which is the ultimate reality. For him
everything in the universe is the will striving endlessly for life by a blind and irresistible
impulse. Man’s restless quest for happiness is also a manifestation of the will. The will
is a self-tortured, restless impulse which is the underlying reality manifesting itself in all
conflicts, in all struggles and in all evils in the world.37
Schopenhauer’s view of life is grim and pessimistic. Life is an endless strife for
the unattainable. The world is a world of endless strife, conflict suffering and evil. Since
life in the world is suffering by its very nature, to procreate is to increase suffering in the
world since it means bringing more people to suffer. For Schopenhauer, life itself is a
crime, existence is evil and the penalty for it is suffering. 38 Schopenhauer maintains that
“in-eliminable suffering is so great a part of our lives that it is essential to our existence:
suffering is essential to life, and therefore does not flow in upon us from outside, but
35
Lagos, Joja Educational Research and Publishers Ltd. 1991, p. 20
36
Arthur Schopenhauer, Essays and Aphorisms. Penguin Classics, United Kingdom. 2004, p. 23
37
Joseph Omoregbe, Modern Philosophy, p. 143
38
Ibid., p. 144
everyone carries around within himself its perennial source”39 Schopenhauer argues that
it is only natural to attempt to free oneself from suffering and that few, if any, persons
would voluntarily choose to live their lives over again:
But perhaps at the end of his life, no man, if he be sincere

and at the same time in possessions of his faculties, will
ever wish to go through it again... Rather than this, he will
much prefer to choose complete non-existence....40
Schopenhauer is arguably one of the major influencers of David Benatar because
of his pessimistic view on life. They both hold that life is an endless strife for the
unattainable and life in the world is suffering. Hence, to procreate is to bring more people
to suffer. So, Benatar states that we should cease to procreate but Schopenhauer
recommends two ways by which the pain and suffering of life can be minimized and they
are; aesthetic contemplation and asceticism. Schopenhauer goes further to reject suicide
as the best remedy to the human predicament, for suicide is despair and not an escape.41
2.7 Existentialism
Existentialism is a philosophical movement which gained prominence in the 20th
century. It is traced to Soren Kierkegaard, a Danish 19th century philosopher, who was
the first to stress and articulate the general themes of existentialism.42 According to
Macquarrie, existentialism is best described as a movement than as a school of
39
Christopher Roland Trogan, Suicide and Freedom from Suffering in Schopenhauer’s “Die Welt als Wille
und Vorstellung”, Open Journal of Philosophy New York, USA. Vol.3, No.1 , 2013, p. 6
40
Schopenhauer, A. The world as will and representation. New York: Dover 1818, Vol. 1, pp: 324-325.
41
Ibid., p. 145
42
Anselm K. Jimoh, An Introduction to Existentialism, Phenomenology and Hermeneutics, Ebony books
and Kreations, Ibadan. 2014, p. 22
philosophy, it should be seen as a style of philosophizing and the focus is not on abstract
speculation but on issues of concrete human existence.43
This movement stresses and emphasizes existence as taking precedence over
essence. For the existentialists, existence is restricted to human existence. Heidegger
expresses this by saying “the being that exists is man, man alone exists. Trees are but do
not exist, Angels are but do not exist, God is but he does not exist.44 According to Joseph
Omoregbe, for the existentialist, existence means to be personally involved in the drama
of life as an actor rather than as a spectator, it means being conscious of the problems of
human life with all the choices open to man and freely opting for a certain way of life
while assuming full responsibility for it.45
Examining the human predicament as an assessment of the existential conditions
of man, the definition of existentialism by William Barret serves well. Barret says that
existentialism is a philosophy that confronts human situation in its totality to ask; what
the basic conditions of human existence are and how man can establish meaning out of
these conditions.46 In existentialism, we discover some themes that help us to articulate
the human predicament, these themes are drawn from human experience. They include
anguish, anxiety, angst, absurdism, facticity, death etc.
The theme of anguish, is common to all existentialist, anguish is one of the
characteristic conditions of human existence. This anguish usually comes with reflection,
43
John Macquarrie, Existentialsim, New York: World Publishing Company, 1983, p. 14
44
Martin Heidegger, The Way Back into the Ground of Metaphysics in Existentialism from Dostoyevskey
to Sartre, (e.d) W. Kaufmaun New York, Meridian Books Inc. 1956, p.215
45
Joseph Omoregbe Contemporary Philosophy: A Simplified History of Western Philosophy, university of
Lagos, Joja Educational Research and Publishers Ltd. 1991, p.38
46
William Barret, Philosophy in the 20th Century, vol. 3, New York: Random House, 1962, p. 143
when we reflect on the contingency of our being, the brevity of life, the basic problems
of life which defy any satisfactory solution. The realization that we do not know the
meaning and purposes of our existence, that we have no answers to our own questions
about our existence gives rise to a disturbing anguish.47
Another theme is absurdism which denotes that there is no meaning in the world,
beyond what meaning we give it. Meaninglessness also embraces the unfairness of the
world because of the world’s absurdity at any point in time, anything can happen to
anyone. It holds that the efforts of humanity to find meaning or rational explanation in
the universe ultimately fail and hence are absurd. The term was borne out of the
existentialist movement when the French philosopher and writer Albert Camus broke
from the philosophical line of thought and published his manuscript “the myth of
Sisyphus”. The after effects of World War II provided the social environment that
stimulated the absurdist views especially in France48.
Facticity of human existence is another theme that bears relevance to the
discourse on the human predicament. The facticity are the limiting factors of human
existence. For the existentialist man’s origin is expressed in ‘throwness’ that man was
thrown into the world, we must either choose our lives or have our lives chosen for us by
the social forces already operating around us. There are no given automatic meanings in
human life. Man, though not the author of his life, yet compelled to assume full
responsibility for his mode of being. Death and decay, sickness, disease,
47
Joseph Omoregbe Contemporary Philosophy: A Simplified History of Western Philosophy, university of
48
George T. Haokip, Understanding Existentialism. Http://www.igntu.ac.in/eContent/Igntu34144597762
Accessed 07/12/2021
disappointments, sorrow, man’s powerlessness in the face of the forces of nature all
constitute the facticity of human existence.49 These themes as we have explored, have
bearings to our discourse on the human predicament.
2.6 Joseph Omoregbe
Aside western and oriental thought, the discourse on the human predicament is
also richly expressed and articulated in African thought especially in the works of Joseph
Omoregbe, a professor of philosophy; university of Lagos, Nigeria.
According to Joseph Omoregbe, the human predicament is the situation in which
man finds himself in this world without knowing why he is here, the purpose of his
existence and what will happen to him when he dies. It is a situation where man finds
himself empty, restless and suffering from so much evil, with so many unanswered
questions in his mind. It is also the situation in which human life appears meaningless
and absurd, a situation which leads some people to resort to suicide in order to terminate
their lives. Some resort to hedonism (let us eat and drink today for tomorrow we may
die) others resort to asceticism, some resort to commitment, some to cultism while others
maintain an attitude of indifference.50
Joseph Omoregbe having identified the different responses that people take
towards the human predicament and pin points the loopholes and then suggests authentic
religion as the best response. The best thing he says, for man to do in order to get out of
the predicament is to seek his maker, his creator, dialogue with him and interact with
49
Joseph Omoregbe Contemporary Philosophy. ibid., p. 51
50
Joseph I. Omoregbe, The Human Predicament: Has Human Life on Earth Any Ultimate Purpose, Any
Ultimate Meaning? An Existential Inquiry, university of Lagos, 2001, p.22
him. Only his maker knows why he made him, why he is in this world. The process of
dialogue and interaction with one’s creator is called religion and it is the only authentic
way out of the human predicament. in the course of this interaction, man’s hitherto
unanswered questions will be answered and his life becomes very meaningful.51
According to Omoregbe, African philosophical thought on the meaning and
purpose of life is closely linked to God because the African concept of life is largely
influenced by traditional religion and God is the originator and creator of man and
universe. Death which is also a feature of the human predicament is viewed in African
thought system as part of God’s creation, made for the purpose of removing people from
the earth when their time is up and that death is a transition and transformation from the
physical into the spiritual world.52 This means that death is not the end but a transitioning
to unite with the creator.
51
52
Offiong Asuquo, A Rationalization of an African Concept of Life, Death and the Hereafter. American
Journal of Social and Management Sciences, University of Calabar. 2011, pp. 171-175
CHAPTER THREE
DAVID BENATAR’S NOTION OF THE HUMAN PREDICAMENT
Nothing is so important to man as his condition in the world. Benatar’s evaluation
of man’s condition reveals that he is in a predicament, one from which extrication is
difficult. Human existence is but a blip in cosmic time and space. What then is it all
about? Benatar says “ultimately nothing”. Despite some limited consolations, the human
condition is in fact a tragic predicament from which none of us can escape, for the
predicament consists not merely in life but also in death. 53 Benatar’s views to life’s big
questions are largely pessimistic. The place of optimism and pessimism in this discourse
points to the two hinges on which questions about life can be discussed. While the
optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds, the pessimist fears this
as true. Benatar argues that a generally pessimistic view is more realistic and accurate.54
In focusing on the human predicament, Benatar acknowledges that other animals
also suffer and die. Many features of our predicament are shared by the other animals,
the distinction is that humans are able to reflect on their predicament to a degree that
other animals are not. They can question the meaning of their own lives.55 Benatar
artfully weaves through topics such as meaning, meaninglessness, quality of life, death,
suicide and immortality to articulate the human predicament.
53
Press, 2017, p. xi
54
Ibid., p.4
55
Ibid., p.8-9
3.1 Meaning of life
Benatar says that there are different kinds of meaning, corresponding to the
different perspectives from which one can ask whether life has meaning. Accordingly,
there are four perspectives; meaning sub specie hominis, meaning sub specie
communitatis, meaning sub specie humanitatis. These he categorized as meaning from
the most limited perspective and they are attainable to a number of humans but this
depletes as the perspective broadens. The fourth perspective; meaning sub specie
aeternitatis which is the meaning from the most expansive perspective it is unattainable
and outside the reach of humans.56
3.1.1 Meaning Sub Specie Hominis
Life can be meaningful from the perspective of an individual. Here we consider
whether some individual’s life has meaning from the perspective of some other
individual, and whether this person makes a sufficiently positive impact on some other
individual in other to make her life meaningful from that other person’s perspective. An
individual’s life has meaning from the perspective of the individual whose life it is. Such
a life is meaningful, if it fulfils some significant purpose or goal by the person whose life
it is. Benatar says that meaning sub specie hominis is nonetheless within the reach of
many people who do attain some of the goals they set for themselves. This is not to say
that meaning is entirely within one’s control. It may be that some people simply cannot
attain or get their lives to have meaning owing to the fact that certain circumstances
56
Cf. David Benatar, The Human Predicament: A Candid Guide to Life’s Biggest Question, Oxford
University Press, 2017, pp. 28-34
conspire against them. Meaning sub specie hominis is not within the reach of
everybody.57
3.1.2 Meaning Sub Specie Communitatis
Life can be meaningful from the perspective of a group of humans, and one of
such is the family. This meaning is attained when the individual play important and
meaningful roles in the lives of the family members. By providing love, support,
company and deep personal connections. Again, Benatar tells us that this meaning is not
true of everybody, owing to the fact that there are people with, weak, or even hostile
family relationships and their lives consequently derive no meaning from the perspective
of the family. Benatar talks of meaning from the perspective of the larger community
though hard to attain, he recognizes that people whose lives are meaningful from this
perspective, contribute significantly to their communities as dutiful and caring doctors or
nurses, selfless charitable workers, devoted teachers, inspiring religious leaders etc.58
3.1.3 Meaning Sub Specie Humanitatis
Judging from the perspective of all humanity, only few people lead lives that are
meaningful because only few people make significant mark or serve an important
purpose. Benatar recognizes the likes of Buddha, William Shakespeare, Albert Einstein,
Nelson Mandela et al., who had global impact and made important positive impact of
global significance. Benatar tells us that there are many people who strive for meaning
sub specie humanitatis, but fail to achieve it to the desired degree. If one’s life has
57
Press, 2017, p. 27-28
58
Ibid., p. 28-29
meaning from the perspective of his or her family because of what he or she means to
them then for an individual to have meaning from the perspective of all humanity, it must
be because of what the individual means to humanity. Alexander Fleming for example
made a major contribution to humanity by discovering ‘penicillin’, the first antibiotic,
without this discovery many, if not millions, more people would have suffered or died
from infections. With this discovery, Fleming made the difference and this gives his work
and thus his life meaning sub specie humanitatis.59
Ending the discourse on meaning of life, Benatar tells us that the somewhat good
news is that our lives can be meaningful from some perspectives and the prospect of
meaning diminishes as the scope of the perspective broadens. In all of these, Benatar
argues that our lives have meaning from the terrestrial perspective and that the most
meaning that anybody is capable of attaining is inevitably significantly limited.
3.2 Meaninglessness
The most expansive kind of meaning that we could want for life is the ‘cosmic
meaning’ meaning sub specie aeternitatis. The bad news Benatar spells out here is that
this kind of meaning is unattainable and since meaning sub specie aeternitatis is
unattainable by humans, it simply conveys the message of our meaninglessness. We are
cosmically insignificant. Although we can have some effect on our planet, we have no
significant impact on the broader universe. Benatar says “we are ephemeral beings on a
tiny planet in one of hundreds of billions of galaxies in the universe a cosmos that is
coldly indifferent to the insignificant specks that we are. It is indifferent to our fortunes
59
Press, 2017, p.30-32
and misfortunes, to injustice, to our hopes, fears, values and concerns. The forces of
nature and the cosmos are blind”.60 The evolution of life, including human life, is a
product of blind forces and serves no apparent purpose. Earthly life is thus without
significance, import or purpose beyond our planet. It is meaningless from the cosmic
perspective. Neither our species nor individual members of it matter sub specie
aeternitatis. Whatever other kind of meaning our lives might have, the absence of this
meaning is deeply disturbing to many.61
For Benatar, many activities are meaningful sub specie communitatis and sub
specie humanitatis and we are pleased about that, but we are alarmed that our lives have
no cosmic meaning sub specie aeternitatis. He argues that cosmic meaning is
unattainable and this features as part of the human predicament we are simply
insignificant specks in a vast universe.
Life is tough, full of striving and struggle, the bits of terrestrial meaning we attain
are important for without them, our lives would not only be meaningless but also
miserable and unbearable. Benatar holds that although we need at least some terrestrial
meaning, it is unsurprising that this does not give us everything that it would be good to
have. The meaning we have from various human perspectives does not give meaning to
the entire human enterprise. The terrestrial meaning is good but the absence of cosmic
meaning is bad.62
60
Press, 2017 p. 13
61
Ibid., pp. 35-36
62
Ibid., pp. 61-62
3.3 Quality of life
Benatar says that the unfortunateness of our lives is not limited to the absence of
cosmic meaning, it is also attributed to the dismal quality of our lives. Both the deficiency
of meaning and poor quality of life are features of the human predicament.63 The quality
of life is a feature of the human predicament not only because it leads to questions about
life’s meaning, but also in its own right. Benatar believes that while some lives are better
than others, none are comparatively or objectively good. Benatar avers that people are
very unreliable judges of the quality of their own lives. He argues that people’s self-
assessments of well-being are unreliable indicators of quality of life because these self-
assessments are influenced by three psychological phenomena which are; the optimism
bias, adaptation and comparison.64
The first of these is an optimism bias, sometimes known as pollyannaism, here
Benatar says that when people are asked to rate how happy they are their responses are
disproportionately as “not too happy”.65 As a result of this bias people when asked to rate
their wellbeing relative to others, their response is that they are doing better than the most
commonly experienced level.
The second psychological phenomenon why people’s judgement about the
quality of their lives are unreliable is known variously as accommodation, adaptation or
habituation. Here one adapts not only to deteriorations but also improvements. Benatar
says that if one’s self-assessment were reliable, they would track improvements and
63
Press, 2017, 64
64
Ibid., pp. 66-67
65
Ibid., p.68
deteriorations in one’s objective conditions. He laments that as we adjust to our new
condition we adapt and judge life from the perspective of our coping mechanisms in such
condition. Benatar gives a clear example, if one suddenly loses the use of both legs, one’s
subjective assessment will drop precipitously. In time however, subjective assessment of
quality of life will improve as one adjusts to the paralysis. One’s objective condition will
not have improved, but one will judge life to be going us less badly than immediately
after the paralysis.66
The third feature of human psychology that compromises the reliability of
subjective assessment of wellbeing Benatar says we may call ‘comparison’. The
subjective assessments of wellbeing involve comparison with the wellbeing of others.
Our judgments about the quality of our own lives are influenced by the perceived quality
of the lives of others. Here, Benatar observes that we are more likely to compare
ourselves with those who are worse off than with those who are better off. In this case
the bad features of all human lives are substantially overlooked in judging the quality of
one’s life. Benatar tells us that the net effect of the three traits is for us to overestimate
the actual quality of our lives.67
Having shown that there are excellent reasons to distrust self-assessment about
the quality of human life. Benatar continues to argue that the quality of people’s lives is
worse than they think it is, he tells us that if we look dispassionately at human life and
control for our biases, we find that all human life is permeated by badness. Benatar says
66
Press, 2017, p. 68-69
67
Ibid., pp. 68-70
“Even in good health much of everyday is spent
in discomfort, we spend much time in the thermal
discomfort we become thirsty and hungry, feeling
either too hot or too cold… minor illnesses like
colds are suffered by almost everybody…the
negative features of life are not just restricted to
unpleasant physical sensations. For example, we
frequently encounter frustration and
irritations…and other obstacles that can take
thousands of hours to overcome, many important
aspirations are unfulfilled, millions of people
seek jobs but remain unemployed, of those who
have jobs, many are dissatisfied with them....
people want to look and feel younger yet they age
relentlessly. When those close to us suffer, we
suffer at the sight of it, when they die, we are
bereft. We are vulnerable to innumerable
appalling fates.”68
Benatar states that, some of the appalling fates that befall us reduces the quality
of our lives. He attests to the fact that there are some perpetuated by other humans hence;
there are diverse range of harms that people suffer at the hands of other humans including
being maligned, beaten, assaulted, raped, tortured and murdered.69 Still discussing the
quality of life Benatar says
“… Our lives contain so much more bad than

good, for example, the most intense pleasures are
short-lived whereas the worst pains can be much
more enduring. Chronic pain is rampant, but there
is no such thing as chronic pleasure. The bad
things come without any effort but one has to
strive to ward them off and attain the good things,
ignorance for example is effortless but
knowledge usually requires hard work.”70
68
Press, 2017, p.73
69
Ibid., p. 76
70
Ibid., pp.77-80
Having discussed that the quality of human life is very bad, Benatar counters
religious optimism; trying to reconcile God’s existence with evil and also other secular
theodicies that express that the bad things in life are necessary in order to appreciate the
good things. Benatar sees that there are problems with this sort of argument, there is
much pain that serve no useful purpose. Secondly, he says that insofar as the good things
in life do require a contrast in order to be fully appreciated, it is not clear that this
appreciation requires as much bad as there is. We do not for example, require millions of
people suffering from chronic pain infectious diseases, advancing paralysis and tumors
in order to appreciate the good things in life.71 Finally he says that the optimism approach,
only partially palliate the human predicament, but we need to note that to palliate a
predicament is not to elude it.72
3.4 Death
Benatar says the prospect of death terrifies many but an even larger number of
people expend a great deal of energy warding it off. The aversion of death is not mere
instinct, when people are asked, they say that death is a fate that they are extremely keen
to prevent. Although death is a release from innumerable living hells to which humans
are vulnerable, it is remarkable how resistant humans are to death.73
Benjamin Franklin, remarked “in this world, nothing can be certain, except death
and taxes”74 Benatar says that Benjamin was only half right. There are tax havens, but
71
Press, 2017, p. 83-85
72
Ibid., p. 91
73
Ibid., pp. 92-93
74
Benjamin Franklin, Letter to Jean Baptiste Le Roy1879, in the writings of Benjamin Franklin, ed. Albert
Henry Smyth, vol x, New York: Macmillan 1907, p. 69
there are unfortunately no death havens, no place where one can hide from death. Each
of us is going to die, we have no control over the fact that we shall die, one can choose
to hasten it, one can also choose the means, however, one cannot choose not to die.75
The human predicament includes the poor quality of human life and our cosmic
insignificance. If living a life of that kind is a predicament why is the end of that life not
a deliverance from the predicament? Benatar responds by saying that death might deliver
us from suffering but annihilation is an extremely costly situation and thus only deepens
the predicament, and death does not solve the problem of our cosmic meaninglessness,
with death, we cease to be, but we do not thereby cease to be cosmically insignificant.76
Benatar pays attention to the question Is death bad? He says for death to be a
feature of somebody’s predicament it would be sufficient that death is bad for that person.
He also contends with the epicurean argument that death is not bad. According to the
epicureans,
“Death is nothing to us since so long as we exist

death is not with us; but when death comes then
we do not exist. It does not then concern either
the living or the dead since for the former it is not
and the latter are no more”.77
Benatar presents the deprivation account as a response to the epicurean argument,
according to this response, death is bad for the being who dies because it deprives that
individual of the good that he or she would otherwise have had. Death is bad for more
than one reason; it is bad not merely because it deprives one of the future good but also
75
Press, 2017, pp. 93-94
76
Ibid., p. 94
77
Epicurus, “Epicurus to Menoceus” in the Stoic and Epicurean Philosophers, ed. Whitney J. Oates. New
York: Random House. 1940, pp. 30-31
because it obliterates one. Death is bad in large part because it annihilates the being who
dies.78 Death brings complete and irreversible end to a being, annihilation of a being
involves a very significant loss namely the loss of the self, not only is one deprived of
future goods but is also destroyed for all eternity. Benatar says that the irreversible
cessation of consciousness is annihilation of the conscious being.79
3.6 Suicide
If death features in the predicament obviously, death by one’s own hand is part
of the human predicament. Benatar avers that one’s death obviously does not solve the
problem of one’s mortality, it does not solve the problem of meaninglessness. Although
suicide like death more generally does not solve the human predicament in its entirety
their situations in which it becomes a reasonable response to one’s condition.80
Benatar finds a place for suicide in his thought, he argues that suicide is
sometimes a reasonable response to a particular human predicament rather than to the
human predicament in general. If an autonomous person’s life is unacceptably
burdensome to him, then suicide is a reasonable topic for discussion. Benatar examines
suicide as a response not only to the worst conditions in which people sometime find
themselves, but also to less severe conditions that might nevertheless be reasonably
judged to make life not worth continuing, these includes less drastic physical condition,
psychological suffering of varying degrees et cetera.81
78
David Benatar, The Human Predicament: A Candid Guide to Life’s Biggest Question, p. 102-103
79
Ibid., pp. 104-109
80
Ibid., pp. 163-164
81
Ibid., p. 166
Benatar responds to several criticisms of suicide and argues that suicide is
sometimes rational and permissible. He says central to judgement about the
appropriateness of a given suicide is the quality of the life that suicide ends. If, when
judged in the right way the quality of a life is or will soon fall below the level that makes
it worth continuing, then all things being equal, suicide is not inappropriate by contrast,
if the quality of the life is above that level, then all things being equal, suicide is
inappropriate.82
Benatar says that suicides tend to shock not because the deaths are often
unexpected by those who hear of them but because they run counter to the deep-seated
natural instinct for self-preservation. Benatar tells us however, if we step back from our
powerful survival instinct and our optimism bias, ending one’s life may seem much wiser
than continuing to live when the burdens of life reach a certain level of severity. Even
while taken the interests of others into account, especially family and friends, Benatar
argues if life’s burdens reach a certain level of severity, it becomes indecent to expect
him or her to remain alive for the benefit of others.83
3.5 Immortality
Benatar says death is bad, and argues that it does not follow from this that being
immortal would be good. Thus, immortality does not meliorate or exacerbate the human
predicament.84 Benatar counters theistic beliefs in an immortal soul, he says that they are
comforting but baseless and derived from wishful thinking. He notes that true
82
Press, 2017, p. 183
83
Ibid., p. 199
84
Ibid., p. 142
immortality is not possible i.e one in which humans do not die in any circumstance at all.
The option of immortality would be bad, since it would extend the sufferings of life. Thus
it does not solve the human predicament since an eternally bad life is still a bad life.
Benatar says that there are figurative senses in which people can gain immortality
for example, people are said to live on in or gain immortality through their children and
subsequent descendants, great artists and writers are said to be immortalized through
their works.85 Benatar says that if true immortality becomes open to everybody, another
very serious problem arises; overpopulation. The earth cannot support an endless
proliferation of immortal humans. Humans would continually be added, but the usual
rate of subtraction as a result of death would be missing. It would not take long for our
planet to become even more crowded than it already is.86
Benatar argues that an eternally blissful life would be so preferable, however
exercising an option to die is not a net disadvantage relative to our current mortal state
because poor quality of life already leads many people to want to die earlier than they
otherwise would. There are some philosophers who aver that an immortal life would be
a life of boredom e.g Bernard Williams, who claims that two conditions would need to
be met in order for immortality to be good for him. First, it must be himself who lives
forever. Second, the state in which he must survive would have to be one that is attractive
to one who live such a life. Bernard argues that the second condition would not be met
85
Press, 2017, p. 149
86
Ibid., p. 152
in an immortal life because one would be inevitably bored by an endless repetition of the
same experiences. In the light of this observation immortality would not be good.87
According to Benatar, being mortal causes many humans considerable anxiety.
The shadow of death loons over our lives. No matter who we are, where and when we
live, and what we do, each of us knows that he or she is doomed to die. This awareness
is one of the chief triggers of existential angst and it spurs attempts to find meaning. our
mortality is an unbearable limit that we seek to transcend. Mortality is thus a brute and
ugly feature of the human predicament. Benatar says that if an immortal version of our
lives were possible, it would not be a good thing. For example, we would age
progressively and suffer increasingly. Moreover, if immortality were wide spread the
earth would rapidly become even more overpopulated than it already is. Benatar tells us
that immortality per se is bad, under specific conditions, eternal life would be better than
the mortal life we lead. Substituting mortality with immortality, while holding other
features of the human predicament constant, would extend the predicament. Thus, in this
regard immortality attempts only to remove mortality which is just one of all that features
as the human predicament.88
3.7 Anti-natalism
Benatar is best known for his advocacy of anti-natalism in his book, Better never
to have been; the harm of coming into existence. This position is his response to the
human predicament, that humans should desist from creating new humans, who will
87
Bernard Williams, “The Makropulos Case: Reflections on the Tedium of Immortality” in Problems of
the Self. Cambridge University Press. 1973, p. 91
88
Press, 2017, pp. 160-161
inevitably be in the same predicament. He says that every birth is a death waiting,
sandwiched between birth and death is a struggle for meaning and a desperate attempt to
ward off life’s suffering. His pessimistic view about the human condition leads to the
anti-natalist conclusion that we ought not to procreate.89
Benatar says that the conclusion that coming into existence is always a harm is
astounding to many people, follows from an axiological asymmetry between harms and
benefits.
Scenario A (X exists)
1. The presence of harm is bad
2. The presence of benefit is good,
An asymmetrical evaluation applies to the absence of harm and benefit:
Scenario B (x never exists)
3. The absence of harm is good, even if that good is not enjoyed by anyone
4. The absence of benefit is not bad unless there is somebody for whom this absence
is a deprivation.90
Benatar tells us that to decide the relative advantages and disadvantages of
coming into existence and of never coming into existence, we need to compare (1) with
(3), and (2) with (4). When we make the first comparison, we find that never existing is
preferable to coming into existence. The absence of harm in Scenario B is an advantage
over the presence of harm in Scenario A. However, when we compare (2) with (4) we
89
David Benatar, The Human Predicament, p. 207
90
David Benatar and David Wasserman, Debating Procreation Is It Wrong to Reproduce? Oxford
University Press, 2015, p. 23
see that the presence of benefit in Scenario A, although good for X, is not an advantage
over the absence of benefit in Scenario B. In other words, Scenario B has an advantage
over Scenario A, but Scenario A has no advantage over Scenario B. We see then that the
axiological asymmetry leads to the conclusion that coming into existence is always a net
harm.91
Benatar goes on to say that we infrequently contemplate the harms that await any
new-born child; pain, disappointment, anxiety, grief and death. For any given child we
cannot predict what form these harms will take or how severe they will be, but we can
be sure that at least some of them will occur, none of these appalling fates befalls the
non-existent. Only existers suffer harm. By ‘existers’, Benatar refers to ‘existing beings’
or preferably, ‘living beings’.92 The idea that coming into existence is always a serious
harm raises a problem for procreation, since all existers suffer harm, procreation always
causes harm.93 Benatar says that this is a hard conclusion for most people to swallow,
and since most people do not reject their very existence and are happy to be alive. The
appraisals about life to be good and enjoying Benatar says are mistaken for precisely the
fact that they enjoy life does not make one’s existence better than non-existence.94
Benatar argues so long as life contains even the smallest quantity of bad, coming
into existence is a harm and if people realized just how bad their lives were, they might
grant that their coming into existence was a harm.95 Creating new people by having
91
David Benatar and David Wasserman, Debating Procreation Is It Wrong to Reproduce? Oxford
92
David Benatar, Better Never to have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence Oxford University Press,
2006, p. 29
93
Ibid., p. 207
94
Ibid., p. 58
95
Ibid., p. 60
babies is so much a part of human life that it is rarely thought even to require a
justification, those who do intend to have a child might do so for any number of reasons
but among these reasons cannot be the interests of the potential child, one can never have
a child for that child’s sake.96 For Benatar, some anti-natalist positions are founded on
either a dislike of children or on the interests of adults who have greater freedom and
resources if they do not have and rear children. His anti-natalist view is different, it arises
not from a dislike of children, but instead from a concern to avoid the suffering of
potential children and the adults they would become.97
In this light, he says that rather than being misanthropic, his views are
philanthropic; having argued that life is filled with unpleasantness and suffering, that we
should avoid having children and that it would be best if humanity came to an end sooner
rather than later. Benatar says that his argument is philanthropic because it suggests that
it is wrong to inflict harm and the only way to avoid this harm is to refrain from
procreation.98
96
David Benatar, Better Never to have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence, Oxford University Press,
2006, p. 2
97
Ibid., p. 8
98
Ibid., p. 223
CHAPTER FOUR
EVALUATION AND CONCLUSION
Having attempted a lucid presentation of Benatar’s assessment of man’s
existential condition in the world, we must admit that human existence involves real
people in concrete situations. As interesting as Benatar’s views are, they are not without
flaws or objection. This section therefore, is devoted to evaluating Benatar’s notion of
the human predicament and his anti-natalist solution, by presenting the supporting
arguments of his view and the arguments against his view.
4.1 ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT OF BENATAR’S POSITION
This part would accommodate a number of scholars who had earlier held such
views as Benatar and those who have adopted Benatar’s view and built on it or have in a
grand-style re-echoed it.
According to Thomas Nagel, Sub specie aeternitatis is a perspective from which
human goals, values and concerns appear so small that they lose their significance.99 This
view clearly supports Benatar’s position when he says that while judging from this
perspective, human life is meaningless and loses its significance. Peter Kugler also shares
a similar sentiment regarding sub specie aeternitatis as objective meaning. He agrees
with Benatar that the meaning of life in this sense, does not depend on human judgements
and valuations and that Life must be objectively valuable “independently of how things
appear to us” in order to have meaning sub specie aeternitatis.100
99
Cf. Peter Kugler,The Benefits of Living Without Meaning Sub Specie Aeternitatis, The Journal of Value
Inquiry, University of Innsbrocks, Austria. 2021, pp. 1-2
100
Ibid., p. 2
Stephen J. Dick says that we live in a universe expansive in space and time; we
contemplate the cosmos with awe. Whether life is rare or common, the cosmic
perspective is an unavoidable framework within which the history of our planet and the
meaning of lives must be explored.101 This expression emphasizes Benatar’s position that
the most expansive perspective from which we can judge the meaning of our lives is from
the perspective of the cosmos and that to adequately discuss the meaning of human life,
it must necessarily involve this perspective.
Clement Vidal writes that humans are insignificant in terms of the space they
occupy in the universe. The earth is ridiculously small compared to the universe. It is a
tiny planet orbiting a common star, in a galaxy composed of billions of stars. Humans
are also insignificant in terms of universal time. He says that our spatiotemporal
extension is thus, ridiculously small seen from a cosmological perspective.102 This
assertion echoes Benatar’s lamentation which is a crucial feature of the human
predicament; that we are insignificant specks in a vast universe.103
H.P. Lovecraft an American writer in his philosophy of Cosmicism, states that
there is no recognizable divine presence, such as a god, in the universe and that humans
are particularly insignificant in the larger scheme of intergalactic existence and are ever
susceptible to being wiped from existence at any moment. The cosmic forces are
indifferent toward humanity and that the universe is uncaring. 104 Lovecraft’s position
101
Clement Vidal, The Beginning and End: The Meaning of Life in a Cosmological Perspective, Springer
International Publishing, Switzerland. 2014, p. ix
102
Ibid., p. xxx
103
David Benatar, The Human Predicament: A Candid Guide to Life’s Biggest Question, Oxford
104
Howard Lovecraft, Cosmicism, http://forums.skadi.net/threads/the-philosophy-cosmicism-of-
Lovecraft. accessed 4/12/2022.
appears to be very close to that of David Benatar, Benatar has no place for God in his
work and aside human insignificance already discussed, Lovecraft and Benatar share the
same view that the universe is indifferent. Benatar says that the universe was indifferent
to our coming and it will be indifferent to our going. He says, the universe is indifferent
not because it has attitudes and does not care about us, but that it has no attitudes at all.105
David Hume shares a similar atheistic view as Benatar; for Benatar, it is hard to
reconcile that with the existence of a purportedly benevolent God, who surely could have
created a world in which billions did not have to die each day to keep others alive and
why he would create some animals as food for others. This he says should weaken one’s
confidence that God would have a satisfying purpose for humans.106 In the same way
David Hume, the Scottish philosopher says “if the maker of this world can do all things,
if he can do whatever he wills then he does not will man’s happiness. Neither men nor
animals are happy. The course of nature tends not to make man happy. The whole earth
... is cursed and polluted”.107 Hume goes further to remind us that men come into this
world in tears, suffer all through life and finally leave it in agony. “The first entrance into
life gives anguish to the new born infant and its wretched parents. Weakness attends each
stage of that life, and it is at last finished in agony and horror”. 108 This view of Hume
largely resonates with those of Benatar notion of the human predicament.
Arthur Schopenhauer seems to have influenced David Benatar. Both of them,
appreciate pessimism as being realistic while assessing human life. According to
105
106
Ibid., pp. 42-44
107
Cf. David Hume, Dialogue Concerning Natural Religion; Middlesex, Penguin Books. 1947, p. x
108
Cf. David Hume, Dialogue Concerning Natural Religion, Ibid., p. x
Schopenhauer, life is an endless strife for the unattainable.109 In Benatar’s words, it is the
cosmic meaning that is unattainable and it is what human strive for, the absence of which
110
is deeply disturbing to many. Schopenhauer says that since life in the world is
suffering by its very nature, to procreate is to increase suffering in the world, since it
means bringing more people to suffer. It is a similar view that makes Benatar to adopt
the anti-natalist position stating that, coming into existence is always a harm which raises
a problem for procreation, since all existers suffer harm, procreation always causes
harm.111
Peter Wessel Zapffe, a Norwegian philosopher presents humans as beings who
aspire to meaning and purpose in a world that is irredeemably meaningless. A recurring
theme in his writings is the paradoxical idea that man has longings and spiritual demands
that reality cannot fulfil. This perspective is central to Zapffe’s notion of the ‘tragic’ and
of his consideration of the human being as a ‘tragic animal’.112 Benatar’s work also
reveals the tragedy of human life; he says that the human condition is tragic predicament;
one from which there is no escape.113
In ancient Greece, figures like Theognis, Sophocles wrote poems and plays about
the idea of anti-natalism that the best thing is not to be born, and the next best thing is to
return quickly to where we came from. For example, Sophocles writes in his Oedipus
109
110
David Benatar, The Human Predicament: A Candid Guide to Life’s Biggest Question, Oxford
111
Ibid., pp. 49-50
112
Gualeni Vella D, Existential Ludology and Peter Wessel Zapffe, Navarro-Remesal et al (eds)
perspectives on the European Videogame. Amsterdam, University Press. 2021, p. 180
113
David Benatar, The Human Predicament p. 2
Colonus “Never to be born is the best story. But when one has come to the light of day
second-best is to leave and go back quick as you can back where you came from.”114 This
view is what Benatar holds when he argues that it is better never to have been and whether
humans collectively decide to stop reproducing or not, human extinction is inevitable.
Holding that human extinction is inevitable, Eduard Hartmann like Benatar developed a
pessimistic system with an explicitly anti-natalist response to the evils of life. He sees
existence as problematic and that the sufferings of humanity can only be solved by the
extinction of the species.115
According to Benatar, those who do intend to have a child might do so for any
number of reasons but among these reasons cannot be the interests of the potential child,
one can never have a child for that child’s sake.116 Jim Crawford who is reckoned to be
an acolyte of Benatar, echoes this when he says that the reasons, we have children are all
selfish.
4.2 ARGUMENTS AGAINST BENATAR’S POSITION
There are also a group of scholars who have argued and rejected Benatar’s view;
in this section we shall present their arguments.
B. V. Miller considering how man himself, the world in which he lives came into
being, states that, they are the questions that men have asked themselves from at least the
earliest times of recorded human thought. On this, he says, a right view is the necessary
114
Oedipus at Colonus by Sophocles lines 1220-1230 translated by Colin John Holcombe Santiago, Chile.
Ocaso Press 2008, p. 69
115
Joshua R. Miller, Utopic Pessimism: The Messianic Underpinnings of the Anti-natalist, Polemic
Charlotte, 2015, pp. 16-19
116
David Benatar, Better Never to have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence, Oxford University
Press, 2006, p. 2
foundation of a true philosophy of life. He says that the human intellect; is so fashioned
that despite its efforts at persuasion of sundry philosophers, it refuses to accept pure
chance, mere fortuitousness as complete response or an exhaustive solution for the
problem of man’s origin. This challenges Benatar’s notion of the origin of human life.117
According to Benatar, we are products of blind evolutionary forces, nature has no
goals, and it is a blind process that unfolds without any end in mind. It neither intends
our existence nor has any goal at which our existence is aimed. Such a view about life,
would no less be permeated with pessimistic orientation which would describe life as
meaningless, B. V. Miller, probes Benatar’s stand by stating that only a right view is a
necessary foundation for a true philosophy of life. Thus, blind evolutionary theory of our
origin does not seem to explain the fact of design and order in the world.118
The thoughts of philosophers like Plato, Thomas Aquinas, Immanuel Kant et
cetera on the immortality of the soul opposes Benatar’s notion that when we die, we are
obliterated for the rest of eternity in other words, after death, there is an irreversible
cessation of consciousness. For example, Plato in Phaedo, gives an account of the
immortality of the soul. Plato averred that human soul is immortal and indestructible.
Plato, even shows that soul pre-existed before coming into this world and does not
depend on the body for existence, hence at death it separates from the body.119
117
Cf. George D. Smith, (ed), The Teaching of the Catholic Church: A Summary of Catholic Doctrine,
London, 1948, pp. 181-195
118
Ibid., p. 185
119
Cf. Aloba F. Benjamin, A Critique of Plato’s Arguments in Defence of the Immortality of The Soul in
the Phaedo, International Journal of Health and Psychology Research Vol.7, Obafemi Awolowo
University 2019 pp.29-35.
Paulos Mar Gregorios, in his theological discussion Life as a gift of God argues
that for the Christian, life is ‘created’, not a product of nature and is thus dependent upon
God evoking in us a free response of love and repentance. Gregorios maintains that the
whole biological life and the life in Christ are equally gifts of grace. 120 For Gregorios,
neither nature nor we, exist from ourselves, or on our own. We come from God, so does
nature. When we acknowledge ourselves and the world as created, we confess that all
reality is contingent and dependent upon God’s creative will for its very existence and
functioning we are not our own, our very existence we owe to God as a gift.121 With this,
Gregorios asserts that man, the cosmos and the whole of reality is dependent upon God’s
creative will for their existence and functioning. Therefore, to judge the meaning of life
from the cosmic perspective as the most expansive of the different perspectives, would
be a misstep on Benatar’s part in accurate judgment. If the cosmos and all therein are
dependent on God then, the most expansive meaning of life can only be derived from
God’s perspective. Thus, our lives become meaningful in relation to God.
William Lane Craig takes this further to assert that without God, life would be
meaningless. According to Craig, since the enlightenment, when modern man threw off
the shackles of religion, he has tried to answer these questions; “Who am I?” “Why am I
here? “Where am I going?” without reference to God, but the answers that have come
back were not exhilarating, but dark and terrible; “You are the accidental by-product of
nature, a result of matter plus time plus chance. There is no reason for your existence.
120
Robin Gill, A Textbook of Christian Ethics, T&T Clark Ltd Edinburgh Scotland, 1995, p. 404
121
Ibid., p. 422
All you face is death.”122 All of which is implicated in Benatar’s work. Modern man,
Craig says thought that when he had gotten rid of God, he had freed himself from all that
repressed and stifled him. Instead, he discovered that in killing God, he had only
succeeded in orphaning himself. For if there is no God, then man’s life becomes absurd.
If God does not exist, then both man and the universe are inevitably doomed to death.123
Kei Udono, critically examining Benatar’s anti-natalist argument, observes the
obscurity and ambiguity of the concepts. First, his concepts of ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are not
clearly defined consequently, there is some ambiguity as to whether such concepts are
synonyms for pleasure and pain or for benefit and detriment, respectively. Benatar claims
that the absence of pain is “good, even if there is nobody to enjoy that good”. However,
unlike the goodness of the absence of pain, the absence of pleasure for the non-existent
is neither good nor bad. The exact meaning of ‘good’ in this context requires more
clarification, since his proposition is not straightforward.124
Furthermore, Kei Udono says that Benatar employs faulty logic in attributing the
badness to human existence in general, based on his assessment of people’s quality of
experience. The goodness of existence can manifest itself in various ways, such as
pursuing worthwhile goals, being free, being empowered, overcoming evil, acting
virtuously and being in good stead with others. Having unpleasant experiences is just one
manifestation of the badness of existence. While Benatar is committed to a certain value
ontology in his assessment of the badness of life or the goodness of existence, his
122
William L. Craig, Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics, Third edition Crossway Books,
Wheaton, Illinois. 2008, p. 71
123
William L. Craig, Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics, Ibid., p. 71
124
Kei Udono, The Harm of Being Brought into Existence a Critical Examination of David Benatar’s Anti-
Natalist Argument, Journal of Philosophy and Ethics in Health Care and Medicine, No. 12, 2018, pp. 3-4
discussion lacks a detailed account of ‘what’ badness is and of ‘why’ something is bad.
A precise and rigorous conceptualization of value is needed in order to determine the
soundness of Benatar’s value argument.125
Andrew Oberg analyzing Benatar’s asymmetry disagrees with him, in that the
view point involved is not the view point of the potential person himself, he says that if
we are really to pursue the potential interests of potential people we must do so from
inside, from their own perspectives and not from ours. The asymmetry involves a third-
party perspective which need not be, since our evaluations are shaped by our own
background biases and prejudices. In this case, Andrew says that the non-existent cannot
have any perspective and as such cannot decide whether existence is preferable to non-
existence or not.126
“Casti Connubii” a papal encyclical given by Pope Pius XI on 31 December 1930,
was released to address new threats to marriage and conjugal unity. Benatar’s anti-
natalism is one of such recent positions that pose a threat to the purpose of marriage and
conjugal unity. The document explores the meaning of Christian marriage and
emphasizes its threefold purpose as borrowed from St. Augustine: to produce offspring,
to grow in conjugal faith, and to show benefit from the sacrament.127
Benatar had argued that for sex to be morally acceptable, it must not be
reproductive, this view is what he calls the anti-reproductive view of sexual ethics, here
125
Kei Udono, The Harm of Being Brought into Existence a Critical Examination of David Benatar’s Anti-
Natalist Argument, ibid., p. 12
126
Andrew Oberg, Asymmetry, Suffering and coping Running Alongside Benatar: Journal of Philosophy
of Life, University of Kochi Japan. Vol 9, 2019, pp. 4-8
127
Amour Katherine, Casti Connubii (1930), by Pope Pius XI, Arizona State University, embryo Project
Encyclopedia. 2012.(https://embryo.asu.edu)
Benatar does not state that coitus (sexual union) is wrong but that those coital acts where
procreation is not prevented are wrong, thus, he finds a place for contraceptives and in
cases of contraceptive failures, leaves open abortive possibility.128 This view is premised
on his position that we do not have a duty to procreate and that it is morally indefensible.
On the contrary, the document Casti Connubii, by Pope Pius XI opposes this view.
First, it places significant weight on the proper use of sexuality in marriage which
is chiefly concerned with procreative and unitive function, as against Benatar’s
presentation of sexuality being pleasure based, thereby rejecting any anti-reproductive
view of sex whatsoever. Second, the document condemns any act (coitus interruptus) or
means (use of contraceptives) by which the natural power to generate life is deliberately
frustrated. The third counter argument is against Benatar’s abortive possibility Casti
Connubi regards all abortion as the unlawful taking of an innocent life, regardless of the
level of development of the fetus or the family’s circumstances. Finally, Casti Connubii
warned that the new attitudes would jeopardize the benefits and purposes of marriage
and it also emphasizes that the conjugal act is opened to love, procreation and upbringing.
Benatar discusses death as a feature of the human predicament, for him death is
bad first because it deprives one of the future good and secondly death obliterates, death
is bad in the large part because it annihilates the being who dies.129 In contrast, the
African perspective conceives death as a natural transition from the visible to the
invisible, the essence of the person, is not destroyed but moves to live with the spirit of
128
David Benatar, Better Never to have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence, Oxford University
Press, 2006, p. 126
129
University Press, 2017, pp. 102-109
the ancestors. Therefore, from an indigenous African ontological viewpoint, death does
not imply an end to life; instead, it marks the beginning of another phase of being.130
Thus, rather than a bad that deprives and annihilates African perspective sees death as a
transition from the physical into the spiritual world.
4.3 AN ASSESSMENT OF THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN NIGERIA
David Benatar presents the dismal and poor quality of life as a feature of the
human predicament. In this section, our preoccupation is to have an honest assessment
of life in Nigeria. Our discussion on the quality of life will be premised on the place of
‘agency’. According to Benatar, humans can act as agents in constituting what we can
discuss as the human predicament through their actions.131 It must however be stated that
Nigeria is not the only country where some humans act as agents of the human
predicament, some humans in other countries who have no appreciation of human life
also inflict colossal quantities of suffering on others.
According to Myles Munroe, “when the purpose of a thing is not known, abuse
is inevitable.”132 The fact of several abuses, ranging from kidnapping, rape, murder,
oppression, tribalism, terrorism, human trafficking, gender-based violence, et cetera are
examples of what diminishes the quality of some lives in Nigeria. Hence, instead of
cherishing human life as sacred, it is desecrated. The SARS/ Police brutality is one many
examples that comes to mind. Many youths were molested and some were even killed,
according to Allwell Uwazuruike, the Nigerian army opened fire on peaceful protesters
130
Cf. Lesiba Baloyi, The African Conception of Death: A Cultural Implication, Dr George Mukhari
Academic Hospital, 2014, pp. 232-236
131
Cf. David Benatar, The Human Predicament, p. 203
132
Cf. Myles Munroe, Keys for Marriage, Whitaker House Pneuma Life Publishing. 2008, p.1
at Lekki Toll Gate, Lagos, and forty-nine persons were reported to have died in clashes
across the country.133 In Nigeria, there have also been instances where the lives of fellow
citizens have been desecrated for political and selfish gains. This point is corroborated
when Benatar says that
“...there is an atrociously diverse range of harms

that people suffer at the hands of other humans
including being betrayed, humiliated, shamed,
denigrated, maligned, beaten, assaulted, raped,
kidnapped, abducted, tortured and murdered.”134
Aside the above mentioned, exploitation and extortion are witnessed to a large
extent in the country. We have heard of instances where workers have been denied their
salaries there by subjecting them to poor living conditions. We have also witnessed
embezzlement of funds in several sectors of the Nigerian economy, whereby allocated
funds met for facilitating progress in developmental schemes in education, health care
etc. are being siphoned to suit personal interest thereby depriving citizens access to
quality education and health care, leaving a good number in deplorable conditions while
others suffer and die of diagnosed sickness and diseases because of poor investment in
health care.
The fact of insecurity in the country, Adeleke Adegbami says is one such fate
that haunts all inhabitants of Nigeria. Security without doubt is sine qua non for the
sound existence of human beings, a nation, its unity and economic prosperity as well as
political stability. Security entails the presence of peace, safety, happiness and the
133
Allwell Uwazuruike, End SARS: The Movement Against Police Brutality in Nigeria, Harvard-Human-
Rights-Journal/https://harvardhrj.com/2020/11/endsars-the-movement-against-police-brutality-in-
Nigeria/. Accessed 20/5/2022.
134
David Benatar, The Human Predicament p. 76
protection of human and physical resources. All threats to human security are also
challenges to health and consequently are detrimental to the physical, psychological and
over all wellbeing of the individual. Thus, we note that insecurity leads to illnesses, low
life expectancy rate, low quality of life and even death135.
Also, Benatar has a space for suicide as a feature of the human predicament. He
avers that if life’s burden reaches a certain level of severity, suicide becomes a reasonable
response to one’s condition. In Nigeria, there are reports that suicide has become one of
the leading causes of death in the country and that almost on weekly basis, reports of
suicides make headlines.136 Because of the dismal quality of life, some Nigerians have
opted for suicide as a response a way out of many sufferings and poor condition in which
they live.
4.4 CONCLUSION
By way of concluding this research work, we attest to the fact that David
Benatar’s notion of the human predicament highlights practical human experience as they
reveal real and concrete issues that concern man. The anti-natalist conclusion he proposes
makes us to contend with widespread intuition to procreate and ask ourselves the critical
question ‘why’? Hence, Benatar pushes us not to take things for granted but engage
critically with things that appear so common to us.
It is in this light, that Oliver Hallich states without missing words that Benatar
should be given the credit of drawing our attention to a question that, surprisingly
135
Adeleke Adegbami, Insecurity: A Threat to Human Existence and Economic Development in Nigeria,
Public Policy and Administration Research, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife. 2013, p. 10
136
Luke Onyekakeyah, Growing rate of suicides in Nigeria https://guardian.ng/opinion/growing-rate-of-
suicides-in-Nigeria/. Accessed 20/5/2022.
enough, is ignored even in books that focus on the “ethics of parenthood” or the “moral
foundation of parenthood”, in which one should think it deserves a central place. Ought
we to procreate? or better still Is it wrong to reproduce? This question certainly deserves
the attention that Benatar gives it by challenging the widespread intuition. Even if one
rejects anti-natalism one should acknowledge the importance of this question.137
Benatar’s approach to life embraces much pessimism and a realistic approach
should not, a realistic approach should therefore appraise optimism and pessimism. In
the sense that we attest to the fact that there are some appalling fates that befalls us which
left in our power we would have averted, and that there are some goods we enjoy in life
of which without them we would not be happy. So, a realistic approach avoids two
extremes. A clear example to buttress this point would be a case scenario; when a silky
rose plant (rosa sericea) is placed before the optimist and the pessimist. While the
optimist appreciates the roses, the pessimist laments the thorns. A realistic stance would
take both roses and thorns as the real and existential nature of the plant. Benatar in his
work argued so much against people’s view on life to be influenced by the optimism bias
and in attempt to clear the bias he falls into the same mistake as he is guided by the
pessimism bias. So, rather than saying life is bad like Benatar or like several optimist that
life is good, a realistic stance would view life as ‘real’, life is real; the bad things and
good things are very much part of reality. It is true that we suffer pains and enjoy
pleasures, there are also some pains that bring about pleasures on the long run and vice
versa.
137
Oliver Hallich et al, The Journal of Value Inquiry, University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany 2022, p. 3
Benatar says better never to have been, this is a wishful hope which cannot be
actualized since one is already existing. The best thing for one to do is to take
responsibility to find the right answer to the question; why is there something rather than
nothing? Consequently, why do we exist rather than not existing? This can only be for a
purpose and if there is a purpose for which we live then it is best that we are existing
rather than not being at all. Given the fact that we have a ‘why’ for existing, Viktor E.
Frankl, tells us that “He who has a why to live can bear with almost any how”.138 With
this in mind, the human predicament does not really constitute a problem for us given
that human life has purpose. On the other hand, Miguel Unamuno asserted that the
problem of man leads us to the problem of God,139 if this statement should be refined and
interpreted, it would simply mean that the reference of man is God. For in him we live,
move and have our being,140 if it is in him, we live, move and have our being then we
have a ‘why’, a purpose to live.
The implications of Benatar’s anti-natalist view are costly, Benatar argues that
for sex to be morally acceptable, it must not be reproductive, this view is what he calls
the anti-reproductive view of sexual ethics, here sexual union should not lead to
procreation. In attempt to define procreation as morally unacceptable, Benatar
encourages a wide range of immoral acts hence, justifying homosexuality lesbianism and
even bestiality, since such sexual unions do not and cannot lead to procreation. A morally
acceptable action cannot lead to several immoral actions, rather than solving the problem
138
Viktor E. Frankl, Man’s Search for Meaning: An Introduction to Logotherapy, India, 2017, p. 9
139
Cf. Miguel Unamuno, Tragic Sense of Life, New York: Dover Publications, Inc. 1954, p. 114
140
Acts of the Apostles Ch. 17:28
Benatar happens to create more moral problems. Based on this, the argument that
procreation is not morally acceptable suffers a mortal loss. On the flip side, this view
suggests hedonistic element in that one can engage in sex solely for pleasure. Another
implication of this view is that while being hedonistic it reduces man to the level of a
pleasure-seeking animal.
Benatar posits that the human condition is accurately described as the human
predicament. We must realize that a predicament sparks reflection or launches a learning
initiative despite being rife with difficulty and uncertainty. A predicament is a very self-
conscious way of learning a way of bringing ourselves to ourselves; we may discover our
limits, our finitude. The nature of our predicament can provide a window for discovering
something about whom we really are. Lastly a predicament may shake things up and
enable us to find ourselves and experience Dasein “being-in-the-world” in a real and
visible way.141 Finally, this research recommends that ‘time’ is of the essence, given the
fact of human limitations and the brevity of life, let us make good use our time and be
committed to a course of setting up structures that can improve the quality of our lives
rather than inflicting harms or subjecting our fellow men to malevolence.
141
Cf. Terrie L. Thompson, Finding Ourselves in a Predicament: Now What Do I Do? University of
Alberta, Phenomenology and practice, volume1, 2007, pp. 105-109
BIBLIOGRAPHY
PRIMARY SOURCES
Benatar, David. The Human Predicament: A Candid Guide

to Life’s Biggest Question, Oxford
University Press, 2017.
____________. Better Never to have Been: The Harm of

Coming into Existence, Oxford University
Press, 2006.
Benatar, David and Wasserman, David. Debating Procreation Is It Wrong to

Reproduce? Oxford University Press,
2015.
SECONDARY SOURCES
Barret, William. Philosophy in the 20th Century, vol. 3, New

York: Random House, 1962.
Blaise, Pascal. Pensées, Translated by W.F Trotter,

Christian Classics Ethereal Library
Publishers, 1660.
Carroll, Sean. The Big Picture on the Origins of Life,

Meaning and the Universe Itself. One
world Publication, London. 2016.
Collins, Steven. Nirvana and Other Buddhist Felicities.

Cambridge University Press.1998.
Copleston, Fredrick. A History of Philosophy: Medieval

Philosophy, vol II, New York: Double day,
1962.
Craig, William. Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and

Apologetics, Third edition Crossway
Books, Wheaton, Illinois. 2008.
Faris, Whitesell. The Problem of Evil as Treated by St.

Augustine. Loyola university Chicago,
1939.
Frankl, Viktor. Man’s Search for Meaning: An
Introduction to Logotherapy, India, 2017.
Gill, Robin. A Textbook of Christian Ethics, T&T Clark

Ltd Edinburgh Scotland, 1995.
Gualeni, Stella et al. Perspectives on the European Videogame:

Existential Ludology and Peter Wessel
Zapffe. Amsterdam, University Press.
2021.
Harvey, Peter et al., (ed). A Companion to Buddhist Philosophy. John

Wiley & Sons. 2015.
Hume, David. Dialogue Concerning Natural Religion;

Middlesex, Penguin Books. 1947.
Jimoh, Anselm. An Introduction to Existentialism,

Phenomenology and Hermeneutics, Ebony
books and Kreations, Ibadan. 2014.
Kesebir Pelin. Scientific Answers to the Timeless

Philosophical Question of Happiness. In E.
Diener et al (eds) Handbook of wellbeing.
Salk Lake City, 2018.
Lanpe, Kurt. The Birth of Hedonism, The Cyrenaic

Philosophers and Pleasure as a way of
Life. Princeton University press. 2015.
Lawhead, William. Voyage of Discovery: A Historical

Introduction to Philosophy, university of
Mississippi, 2002.
Macquarrie, John. Existentialism, New York: World

Publishing Company, 1983.
Makumba, Maurice. Introduction to Philosophy, Paulines

Publication Africa, Kolbe press: Kenya.
2005.
Merizz, Jirah. What is Man, AB Philosophy, University of

the Philippines, 2021.
Miller, Joshua. Utopic Pessimism: The Messianic
Underpinnings of the Anti-natalist,
Polemic Charlotte, 2015.
Mondin, Battista. Philosophical Anthropology; Man: An

Impossible Project, Urbaniana University
Press, Rome. 1985.
Munroe, Myles. Keys for Marriage, Whitaker House

Pneuma Life Publishing. 2008
Omoregbe, Joseph. Contemporary Philosophy: A Simplified

History of Western Philosophy, university
of Lagos, Joja Educational Research and
Publishers Ltd. 1991.
______________. Modern Philosophy: A Simplified History

of Western Philosophy, university of
Lagos, Joja Educational Research and
Publishers Ltd. 1991.
______________. Knowing Philosophy: A General

Introduction, Lagos: Joja Educational
Research and publisher Ltd., 1990.
Rosen, Stanley. The Philosopher’s Handbook, Essential

Readings from Plato to Kant, Random
House New York, 2000.
Sarah, Perry. Every Cradle Is a Grave: Rethinking the

Ethics of Birth and Suicide. Charleston,
WV: Nine-Banded Books, 2014.
Schopenhauer, Arthur. Essays and Aphorisms. Penguin Classics,

United Kingdom. 2004.
_______________. The world as will and representation. New

York: Dover 1818.
Smith, George (ed). The Teaching of the Catholic Church: A

Summary of Catholic Doctrine, London,
1948.
Sophocles. Oedipus at Colonus translated by Colin
John Holcombe Santiago, Chile. Ocaso
Press 2008.
Thompson, Samantha. Augustine on Suffering and Order:

Punishment in Context, university of
Toronto, 2010.
Tiziano, Dorandi. The Cambridge History of Hellenistic

Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.
1999.
Vidal, Clement. The Beginning and End: The Meaning of

Life in a Cosmological Perspective,
Springer International Publishing,
Switzerland. 2014.
Whitney, Oates (ed). Epicurus, “Epicurus to Menoceus” in the

Stoic and Epicurean Philosophers, New
York: Random House. 1940.
Wilcox, Eugene, Human Limitations in Pascal’s Pensees,

The Kansas State Teachers College of
Emporia, United State of America, 1968.
DICTIONARY AND ENCYCLOPEDIA
Babcock, Gove (ed). Merriam Webster’s Third New

International Dictionary of the English
Language unabridged, USA, Springfield,
Massachusetts. 1981.
ARTICLES AND JOURNALS
Adegbami, Adeleke. Insecurity: A Threat to Human Existence

and Economic Development in Nigeria,
Public Policy and Administration
Research, Vol.3, No.6, Obafemi Awolowo
University, Ile-Ife. 2013.
Asuquo, Offiong. A Rationalization of an African Concept of

Life, Death and the Hereafter. American
Journal of Social and Management
Sciences, University of Calabar. 2011.
Baloyi, Lesiba et al. The African conception of death: A cultural
implication. In L. T. B. Jackson, et al.,
(Eds.), Toward sustainable development
through nurturing diversity: Proceedings
from the 21st International Congress of the
International Association for Cross-
Cultural Psychology. 2014.
Benjamin, Franklin. Letter to Jean Baptiste Le Roy1879, in the

writings of Benjamin Franklin, ed. Albert
Henry Smyth, vol x, New York: Macmillan
1907.
Cohoe, Caleb. What Does the Happy Life Require?

Augustine on What the Summum Bonum
Include, Forthcoming in Oxford Studies in
Medical Philosophy. 2020.
Grunbaum, Adolf. Why is There a World at All, Rather Than

Just Nothing? University of Pittsburgh
Ontology Studies 9. 2009.
Hallich, Oliver et al. The Journal of Value Inquiry, University

of Duisburg-Essen, Germany 2022.
Kugler, Peter. The Benefits of Living Without Meaning

Sub Specie Aeternitatis, The Journal of
Value Inquiry, University of Innsbrocks,
Austria. 2021.
Oberg, Andrew. Asymmetry, Suffering and coping Running

Alongside Benatar: Journal of Philosophy
of Life, University of Kochi Japan. Vol 9,
2019.
Omoregbe, Joseph. The Human Predicament: Has Human Life

on Earth Any Ultimate Purpose, Any
Ultimate Meaning? An Existential Inquiry,
university of Lagos, 2001.
Rachel, James et al. A Review of David Benatar, The Human

Predicament: A Candid Guide to Life’s
Biggest Question, Springer International
Publishing AG, published online, 2018.
Thompson, Terrie. Finding Ourselves in a Predicament: Now
What Do I Do? University of Alberta,
Phenomenology and practice, volume1,
2007.
Udono, Kei. The Harm of Being Brought into Existence

A Critical Examination of David Benatar’s
Anti-Natalist Argument, Journal of
Philosophy and Ethics in Health Care and
Medicine, No. 12, 2018.
Williams, Bernard. “The Makropulos Case: Reflections on the

Tedium of Immortality” in Problems of the
Self. Cambridge University Press. 1973.
INTERNET SOURCES
Amour, Katherine. Casti Connubii (1930), by Pope Pius XI,

Arizona State University, embryo Project
Encyclopedia,2012.https://embryo.asu.edu
William, Collins (ed). Collins--English--dictionary-

http://www.dictionary.com/what-is-a-
predicament/dictionary.com/2006.
Accessed 2/8/2021.
Spencer, MC Daniel. The-most-depressing-book-ever-written-

death-bystarvation-by-hegesias-of-kyrene.,
http://tales-of-times-forgotten-com.
Accessed 06/12/2021.
People, pill. who-is-david-benatar-biography-

http://peoplepill.com/amp/people/
accessed 6/9/2021.
George, Haokip. Understanding-Existentialism-what-is

existentialism.http://www.igntu.ac.in/eCon
tent/Igntu-eContent/-34144597762.
Accessed 7/9/2021.
Howard, Lovecraft. The-philosophy-of-cosmicism-of-

HowardsLovecraft.http://forums.skadi.net/
threads/the-cosmicism-of-lovecraft

An Evaluation of David Benatar Notion On Human Predicament

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

An Evaluation of David Benatar Notion On Human Predicament

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AN EVALUATION OF DAVID BENATAR’S NOTION OF THE HUMAN

UWAGBALE COLLINS IZIEGBE

Matric Number: ART1813428

BEING AN ESSAY SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY,

ST. ALBERT THE GREAT MAJOR SEMINARY, IDOWU-OFFONRAN, IN

AFFILIATION WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF BENIN, BENIN CITY, IN

PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE AWARD OF

BACHELOR OF ARTS DEGREE IN PHILOSOPHY

This is to certify that the Essay titled: AN EVALUATION OF DAVID BENATAR’S

NOTION OF THE HUMAN PREDICAMENT, submitted to the Department of

of Bachelor of Philosophy, is a record of original research carried out by me: Collins

their lips constantly pressed against life’s bitter cup.

I am grateful to God Almighty, who always leads us in the triumphant following

I solemnly express my unquantifiable sentiment of gratitude to my ArchBishop;

My candid appreciation and indebtedness go to my dear and lovely Parents Mr.

Collins Iziegbe UWAGBALE

The human predicament is an assessment of the existential condition of man. It is an

Title Page ………………………….……………...…….……….……………….. i

Certification Page ……………….…………….……………………….………… ii

Dedication …………………………. ………….………………………………… iii

Table of Contents …………………………………….………………………….. vi

1.1 Statement of problem ………………………………………………………… 1

1.2 Background of study …………………………………………………………. 1

1.3 Aim and objectives …………………………………………………………. 2

1.4 Relevance of study …………………………………………………………… 2

1.5 Scope of study ……………………………………………………………….. 3

1.6 Methodology …………………………………………………………………. 3

1.7 Clarification of term …………………………………………………………. 4

1.7.1 Man ………………………………………………………………………. 4

1.7.2 Optimism ……………………………………………………….………… 4

1.7.3 Pessimism ………………………………………………………………… 5

1.7.4 Predicament ………………………………………………..…...……...… 5

1.8 Life and works of David Benatar …………………………………………...... 6

PHILOSOPHERS VIEW ON THE HUMAN PREDICAMENT

2.1 Hegesias of Cyrene …………………………………………………………... 7

2.2 Siddartha Gautama (Buddha) ………………………………………………… 8

2.3 Augustine ……………………………………………………………………. 9

2.4 Blaise Pascal …………………………………………………………………. 11

2.5 Arthur Schopenhauer ………………………………………………………… 13

2.6 Existentialism ………………………………………………….……….……. 14

2.7 Joseph Omoregbe ……………………..………………………………..……. 17

DAVID BENATAR’S NOTION OF THE HUMAN PREDICAMENT

3.1 Meaning of life ……………………………………………………………….. 19

3.1.1 Meaning Sub Specie Hominis ……………………………………………… 20

3.1.2 Meaning Sub Specie Communitatis ………………………………………... 21

3.1.3 Meaning Sub Specie Humanitatis …………………………………………. 21

3.2 Meaninglessness of life ……………………………………………………… 22

3.3 Quality of life ………………………………………………………………… 24

3.4 Death ………………………………………………………….…………….... 27

3.5 Suicide ……………………………………………………………………….. 29

3.6 Immortality …………………………………………………………………... 30

3.7 Anti-Natalism ………………………………………………………………... 32

EVALUATION AND CONCLUSION

4.1 Arguments in support ………………………………….……………..……… 36

4.2 Arguments Against ………………………………….……………………….. 40

4.3 Assessment of the quality of human life in Nigeria …….……….…………… 46

4.4 Conclusion …………………………….……….……….……………….….… 48

1.1 Statement of problem

in common parlance. It only seems to be a relevant discourse among philosophers and

It is on this basis that this study becomes highly relevant.

1.2 Background of study

A deep reflection on our human experiences spurs us to contemplate on the