Fair point, even if my personal feeling is that it would be the same even without the killing (even if indeed the killing itself indeed would alone suffice too).
We can amend the RC2 attempt to avoid the killing : Start with the world with the seeds for huge numbers of lives worth-living-even-if-barely-so, and propose to destroy that world, for the sake of creating a world for very few really rich and happy! (Obviously with the nuance that it is the rich few whose net happiness is slightly larger than the sum of the others).
My gut feeling does not change about this RC2 still feeling repugnant to many, though I admit Iβm less sure and might also be biased now, as in not wanting to feel different, oops.
I moderately agree, but I do think there is commonly an ordering effect here, arising both from the phrasing of the RC and the way people often discuss it.
I think the killing would probably explain the intuitive repugnance of RC2 most of the time, though.
Fair point, even if my personal feeling is that it would be the same even without the killing (even if indeed the killing itself indeed would alone suffice too).
We can amend the RC2 attempt to avoid the killing : Start with the world with the seeds for huge numbers of lives worth-living-even-if-barely-so, and propose to destroy that world, for the sake of creating a world for very few really rich and happy! (Obviously with the nuance that it is the rich few whose net happiness is slightly larger than the sum of the others).
My gut feeling does not change about this RC2 still feeling repugnant to many, though I admit Iβm less sure and might also be biased now, as in not wanting to feel different, oops.
I moderately agree, but I do think there is commonly an ordering effect here, arising both from the phrasing of the RC and the way people often discuss it.