= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
MugaSofer comments on Welcome to Less Wrong! (July 2012) - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (843)
One world contains pople suffering horribly. The other contains a person suffering horribly. And no-one else.
So, the difference is that in one world there are many people, rather than one person, suffering horribly. How on Earth can this difference make the former world better than the latter?!
Because it doesn't contain anyone else. There's only one human left and they're "suffering horribly".
Suppose I publicly endorse a moral theory which implies that the more headaches someone has, the better the world becomes. Suppose someone asks me to explain my rationale for claiming that a world that contains more headaches is better. Suppose I reply by saying, "Because in this world, more people suffer headaches."
What would you conclude about my sanity?
Most people value humanity's continued existence.