What you are referring to are "Utility Monster" arguments. I've yet to see a version of the Utility Monster that would actually happen in the real world. The be

What you are referring to are "Utility Monster" arguments. I've yet to see a version of the Utility Monster that would actually happen in the real world. The better ones involve a computer that rules the world and is given a metric that seems good, but leads to bad consequences when it is maximized at the expense of everything else. But we aren't ruled by such a computer - we're still ruled by people. > "No, because the suffering of the women will inevitably be greater" IMO, this is obviously true. Why wouldn't it be the real reason?