4 ms·
How they value unborn future lives also veers into absurdity when you realize that the logical goal from a utilitarian perspective then is to populate the unive
by Sol- 4y ago
How they value unborn future lives also veers into absurdity when you realize that the logical goal from a utilitarian perspective then is to populate the universe with trillions upon trillions of humans, just as long as each human at least has some infinitesimally small net happiness. You don't need them to be particularly happy, just happy enough to barely not want to kill themselves.
I think I'd rather prioritize making the billions on earth we have right now very happy instead.
- YellOh 4y agoNot all utilitarian roads lead to the repugnant conclusion. Ex. being "in favor of making people happy but neutral about making happy people" is another valid answer. A pure negative utilitarian is the other extreme - we shouldn't make any more lives at all, because every new person (& animal?) will inevitably suffer during their existence.
- fasterik 4y agoThat's a logical consequence of one possible view in population ethics, which is orthogonal to utilitarianism. There are equally counter-intuitive consequences of discounting future lives or not valuing them at all. What makes this specific point in time so much more important than every other point in time? Can we do anything we want to make our lives better regardless of future consequences?