You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

pragmatist comments on "Stupid" questions thread - Less Wrong Discussion

40 Post author: gothgirl420666 13 July 2013 02:42AM

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

Comments (850)

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

Comment author: pragmatist 13 July 2013 06:12:37PM *  2 points [-]

The effort involved is not the only cost. Tigers are sentient beings capable of suffering. Their lives have value. Plus there is value associated with the existence of the species. The extinction of the Bengal tiger in the wild would be a tragedy, and not just because of all the trouble those guys with guns would have to go to.

Comment author: DanielLC 13 July 2013 08:56:09PM 4 points [-]

While I would agree that their lives have value, it's not clear that it's positive value. Life in the wild is not like life in civilization. It sucks.

Also, the value of the lives they influence will most likely be more important than their lives. They eat other animals on a regular basis.

Life in the wild being what it is as opposed to what it could be is a tragedy. Life in the wild existing at all may well be a tragedy. Perhaps what we really ought to do is just burn down the wild, and make that way of life end.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 13 July 2013 06:30:53PM 2 points [-]

Also, tigers are presumably having some ecological effect, so there might be costs to a tigerless region.

Comment author: Sarokrae 14 July 2013 09:09:16AM 1 point [-]

Surely a more obvious cost is the vast number of people who like tigers and would be sad if they all died?

Comment author: pragmatist 14 July 2013 02:01:04PM 2 points [-]

Eh, I bet most of them would get over it pretty quick. Also, I'm not a utilitarian.