Benatar has a principle of asymmetry, i.e. that coming into existence as a human being is coming into a world in which harm is more likely than well-being. This is Thesis 1. Thesis 2 is that thesis 1 entails that one should not procreate. The threat of the end of civilization and the extinction of humanity by climate change (which Benatar does not mention) renders ‘do not procreate’ a notion no longer counter-intuitive. Thesis 3 concerns ‘population and extinction’: he envisages ‘population zero’ as a desirable consequence of thesis 2 even though ‘The last generation to die out would bear heavy burdens’. Benatar writes, ‘It would indeed have been better if no people had been added to the Edenic Lives of Adam and Eve’. The Blue Bird by Maurice Maeterlinck one hated. Benatar cites two schools of thought in the Talmud—the House of Hillel who thought the creation of humans was good and the House of Shammi thought it bad. Christians following Aquinas’ omne ens est bonum may find some Jewish notions quite the opposite of a Christian conviction, that, to be, is simply good.

中文翻译：

---

有没有理由反对做人？重新评价大卫贝纳塔尔从未有过的更好：晚期资本主义能否阻止气候变化？如果没有，谁想成为人类或后人类？

Benatar 有一个不对称原则，即作为一个人的存在就是进入一个伤害比幸福更可能的世界。这是论题 1。论题 2 是论题 1 要求人们不应该生育。气候变化（贝纳塔尔没有提到）导致文明终结和人类灭绝的威胁使“不要生育”这个概念不再违反直觉。论文 3 关注“人口与灭绝”：他将“人口为零”视为论文 2 的理想结果，即使“最后一代灭绝的人将承担沉重的负担”。Benatar 写道，“如果没有人被添加到亚当和夏娃的伊甸园生活中，那确实会更好”。莫里斯·梅特林克的《蓝鸟》令人讨厌。贝纳塔尔引用了《塔木德》中的两种思想流派——希勒尔家族认为人类的创造是好的，而沙米家族则认为它是坏的。追随阿奎那的 omne ens est bonum 的基督徒可能会发现一些犹太观念与基督徒的信念完全相反，即存在就是好的。