Dentin comments on On Caring - Less Wrong

99 Post author: So8res 15 October 2014 01:59AM

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

Comments (272)

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

Comment author: RichardKennaway 09 October 2014 09:07:05AM 5 points [-]

Once you've decided to compare charities with each other to see which would make the most effective use of your money, can you avoid comparing charitable donation with all the non-charitable uses you might make of your money?

Peter Singer, to take one prominent example, argues that whether you do or not (and most people do), morally you cannot. To buy an expensive pair of shoes (he says) is morally equivalent to killing a child. Yvain has humorously suggested measuring sums of money in dead babies. At least, I think he was being humorous, but he might at the same time be deadly serious.

Comment author: Dentin 17 October 2014 04:12:56PM 0 points [-]

The biggest problem I have with 'dead baby' arguments is that I value them significantly below the value of a high functioning adult. Given the opportunity to save one or the other, I would pick the adult, and I don't find that babies have a whole lot of intrinsic value until they're properly programmed.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 21 October 2014 03:08:49AM *  0 points [-]

If you don't take care of babies, you'll eventually run out of adults. If you don't have adults, the babies won't be taken care of.

I don't know what a balanced approach to the problem would look like.