I tend to agree that there are lives (human or not) not worth living, but my point is that it’s very difficult to consistently identify them by using my only own preference ordering. Saying “I’d rather die than live like that” is distinct from “this is worse than non-existence.”
(I’m assuming we’re not taking into account externalities and opportunity costs. An adult male lion’s seems pretty comfortable and positive, but it entails huge costs for other animals)
It’s even harder if you have to take into account the perspectives of the interested parties. For instance, in the example we’re discussing, SK people could also complain that your utility function implied that preventing one NK birth is equal to saving 10 SK lives. Even the implication that moving a NK person to SK is better than saving 10 SK lives is sort of implausible—for both NKs and SKs alike.
Saying “I’d rather die than live like that” is distinct from “this is worse than non-existence.”
Can you clarify?
Even the implication that moving a NK person to SK is better than saving 10 SK lives is sort of implausible—for both NKs and SKs alike.
I don’t know what they would find implausible. To me it seems plausible.
I tend to agree that there are lives (human or not) not worth living, but my point is that it’s very difficult to consistently identify them by using my only own preference ordering. Saying “I’d rather die than live like that” is distinct from “this is worse than non-existence.” (I’m assuming we’re not taking into account externalities and opportunity costs. An adult male lion’s seems pretty comfortable and positive, but it entails huge costs for other animals) It’s even harder if you have to take into account the perspectives of the interested parties. For instance, in the example we’re discussing, SK people could also complain that your utility function implied that preventing one NK birth is equal to saving 10 SK lives. Even the implication that moving a NK person to SK is better than saving 10 SK lives is sort of implausible—for both NKs and SKs alike.