For instance, given utilitarianism, the Equality Result probably implies that there should be a massive shift in neartermist resources toward animals, and someone might find this unbelievable.
I would make the same claim more strongly: “modus tollens” / “reductio ad absurdum” (as in, “this assumption gives a conclusion I don’t like”, rather than “this gives an internally inconsistent conclusion”) style ethical reasoning is, broadly speaking, not good. Unless you believe standard 21st century morality is correct about everything, you should expect your ethical assumptions to lead to some unexpected results. Ozy wrote something about this that I really liked:
[I]f your moral reasoning doesn’t produce conclusions that seem absurd on the face of it… why are you bothering? I want to be the sort of person who would have come up with the absurd conclusion that slavery is wrong, or the absurd conclusion that women should have rights, or the absurd conclusion that sodomy shouldn’t be illegal; therefore, right now, I am the sort of person who comes up with the absurd conclusions that eating meat is wrong, malaria net donations are morally mandatory, and global warming is really important.
OP said something similar, which is a less general argument but, I think, harder to dispute:
Essentially, it amounts to casting doubt on a broadly empirical conclusion—that particular animals have certain capacities that allow them to realize some amount of welfare—based on a moral conclusion.
I thought this was the most powerful sentence under the “Balking at the Implications” heading.
I would make the same claim more strongly: “modus tollens” / “reductio ad absurdum” (as in, “this assumption gives a conclusion I don’t like”, rather than “this gives an internally inconsistent conclusion”) style ethical reasoning is, broadly speaking, not good. Unless you believe standard 21st century morality is correct about everything, you should expect your ethical assumptions to lead to some unexpected results. Ozy wrote something about this that I really liked:
OP said something similar, which is a less general argument but, I think, harder to dispute:
I thought this was the most powerful sentence under the “Balking at the Implications” heading.
Thanks for this, Michael! I hadn’t seen that line from Ozy. I really like it.