Is it good if animals come to exist? Net-welfare and the pleasure suffering asymmetry

Abstract

Assessing whether non-human animals have net-positive lives is both conceptually coherent and ethically significant for decisions affecting animal population sizes. Integrating axiological asymmetry views—theories that accord greater moral weight to negative welfare than to positive welfare—with pervasive empirical uncertainty regarding animal subjective experiences indicates that bringing many animals into existence is, in expectation, bad. Conversely, evolutionary considerations suggest that positive mood functions as a fitness-enhancing genetic adaptation in humans; given relevantly shared selective pressures and affective mechanisms, many animal species may likewise maintain predominantly net-positive welfare. Because these ethical and evolutionary arguments lead to opposing conclusions, current knowledge remains insufficient to determine whether the creation of most animals is, in expectation, good or bad. Further empirical research into animal affective states, paired with axiological refinement, is required before enacting irreversible interventions that alter animal populations. – AI-generated abstract.