Nonagon
2yr ago
Any hired killer who actually put themselves up online openly would get immediately arrested, and anybody who googles "hire killer online" will be led to a police honeypot and promptly arrested. Because duhhhh.
Nonagon
2yr ago
I think good, as the children would then live, and children dying is bad. It is a pretty foundational moral intuition on my part that children dying is bad and things that exclusively cause children to not die are good, and I'm pretty sure it's extremely widespread, to the point I would very seriously have to rethink my model of the general population if normies disagreed.
Nonagon
2yr ago
But if somehow he were to lose the ideological reason, he'd automatically discard the economics reason.
I doubt it. The economics reason is pretty rock solid for me, and I don't feel any particular ideological attachment to not executing, say, Jeffrey Dahmer or Ted Bundy (beyond, perhaps, that they plead guilty and so spared everybody the rigamarole of their trial).
There's no appropriate, just way to do executions more cheaply - if you speed up the process to cut down the legal fees, you also greatly increase the unconscionable possibility of an innocent man being executed for a crime he didn't commit.
Nonagon
2yr ago
The point of voting is to manage the myriad distinct interests of the whole population, which does in fact require people to vote for resources to be allocated to them at the expense of everyone else. If not directly in cash payments, then indirectly in public works projects that benefit their district, laws that benefit their industry, and the like. There's no nice clean law that exists up in heaven and is totally neutral between the whole population, certainly not any that is actually available to us lowly mortals here on Earth.
Nonagon
2yr ago
The people who are "unable to influence their mortality rate on their own," in the AMF's model, are children under five years old. So yes. I would say they are unable to influence their mortality rate on their own, and I don't think "that's the way it should be" is a particularly likely conclusion for them any more than it is for any other four year old on the planet. If you think that's a likely conclusion, then I suppose we have completely incompatible moral principles.
Nonagon
2yr ago
If you prefer ancient traditions to any actual modern evidence, you could go read the bit in the Book of the City of the Ladies where de Pizan discusses the idea that women are more lusty than men, and points out (in more polite terms) that there are no female-serving whorehouses. As her basic premise remains true today, cross-culturally, etc, it seems like she's in the right and Tiresias is in the wrong.
Okay? How is this related to utilitarianism? If I'm just going to ignore all moral advice to make up rules and do whatever I feel like because I think I'm better than everybody else, I can do that as a deontologist or a utilitarian.
More options
Context Copy link