A Critique of Blackshaw’s Ethical Argument Against Procreation

2025-11-16T12:04:42+00:00

Recent decades have witnessed a decline in birth rates and a growing trend toward voluntary childlessness, phenomena reflected in emerging ethical theories such as antinatalism. This study critically analyzed one of the most prominent arguments in this domain—Bruce Blackshaw’s “Applying Pascal’s Wager to Procreation.” Inspired by Pascal’s Wager and McMahan’s Asymmetry Principle, Blackshaw argues that since a child may one day lose faith and face eternal torture, procreation is morally impermissible, regardless of the low probability of such an outcome. He concludes that moral responsibility requires individuals to avoid reproduction altogether, either through celibacy or sterilization. This study critiqued Blackshaw’s argument from three perspectives: (1) its implausible implications, such as generalizing to all moral decisions and disruption of everyday life; (2) foundational critiques by moral philosophers who reject asymmetry principle; and (3) incompatibility with theological foundations, particularly within the Islamic tradition, such as the neglect of key considerations including the moral responsibility of children, the educational role of parents, and the diverse interpretations of eternal damnation. From an Islamic perspective, procreation is not a hazard but rather part of the prophetic tradition, human nature, and the wise design of creation. Birth is seen as a gateway to development, choice, and proximity to God.

Iranian Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine

A Critique of Blackshaw’s Ethical Argument Against Procreation