MugaSofer comments on Undiscriminating Skepticism - Less Wrong

97 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 14 March 2010 11:23PM

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

Comments (1329)

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

Comment author: MugaSofer 26 April 2013 12:48:12PM *  -1 points [-]

No, it suffices if less women's happiness sacrificed are needed than the amount of men whose happiness will be increased (assuming the "amount of happiness" - whatever that is to mean in the first place - is equal per individual). Then you can regard the happiness of women and still score a net increase in happiness. That's the whole point of the argument.

^ Upvoted for this.

I don't understand what you were saying in the second sentence.

If you reject deals with positive expected outcomes because they violate some sort of ethical law, you're a deontologist. That's what deontology is.