To achieve negative utilitarianism on an individual scale would imply becoming a vegetable or avoiding productive but painful things if you can’t predict how they’ll reduce your own suffering long-term (exercise, self-control). To achieve it on a global scale would mean the instant, unflinching eradication of all life.
I have been reading negative utilitarian writers (Perry, Benatar), and cannot find why their case against existing is wrong - even though it screams in the face of how we are evolutionarily and socially drawn to think. Rather, I feel it is strongly intuitive, an answer to a puzzle I had long given up trying to solve (atheist theodicy). Perhaps I’m too optimistic about the virtue of thinking driven by evolution and society, but it irks me I’m so quick to accept the conclusion.
Do you find negative utilitarianism wrong? Why, if so?
If you agree with it, how has that changed your own life?
And the excellent Point-by-point critique of Ord’s “Why I’m Not a Negative Utilitarian” by Magnus Vinding.