a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by tauta_krypta
tauta_krypta  ·  3198 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: The Repugnant Conclusion

I'd have to agree the most with 2.8. Surely a life worth living is one where it would be preferable to create an additional person who lives such a life, all else being equal, and therefore there is a great benefit to having very many people living lives worth living. The problem seems to be that the idea of a life only barely worth living is considered to be horrible, whereas surely if it would be horrible, it isn't worth living?

I think this mostly arises from the difference between a life worth continuing and a life worth creating. The accepted view of suicide and euthanasia (especially in the US) seems to be that only the very worst, most painful lives should possibly be ended. Yet if you wouldn't have a child if it was destined to live a life in population Z, then surely those lives are not worth creating?





aeromill  ·  3197 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I agree completely. The addition of a life worth living is exactly that: worth it. But then you have the idea of Average Utilitarianism back. Do you want a bunch of low positive happiness citizens in a population, or a low population with high average utilitarianism? The only issue pointed out is that you can have a population of 1 with slightly higher happiness than a population of 5 million with slightly lower happiness each. So what? In the end, happiness is only important because it's what any individual wants. The whole justification for Utilitarianism is based around the principle that happiness is the end all be all for every individual. That being said, the counter intuitive nature of this complain means nothing, especially since intuition means very little in regards to logic.