Larks comments on The Difficulties of Potential People and Decision Making - Less Wrong

5 Post author: FrankAdamek 04 August 2009 06:14AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (38)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Larks 05 August 2009 09:32:51AM 0 points [-]

In order for killing unhappy people to be justified, then killing the living would basically have to not generate disutility

No, it would only have to generate less disutility than the victims were unhappy to start with. If everyone were an average utilitarian, and was overjoyed that we were raising the mean, this type of killing might even have positive externalities.

I think this suggests that total utilitarianism is a better system: the Repugnant Conclusion is a far-oft danger, whereas if we adopted average utilitarianism, we would be in immediate danger of massacres.

Of course, an alternative ethical system may be better still.

Comment author: FrankAdamek 05 August 2009 11:50:29AM 0 points [-]

In general with all the discussion here of average vs total utilitarianism, in my perception both are well-meaning generally great solutions, but both do have their oddities, pursuant to applying the same mathematical measurement to both situations. Most of this discussion seems to be people just arguing over which oddity they prefer to accept, how you can discount those oddities, etc. But in both cases, it requires something more than the fundamental rule, saying "Yes let's consider the average except when that means killing*. That works for a given person but it seems more to be patching up theories that don't quite fit here, rather than using a theory that doesn't require a patch at all.