It sounds like youâre discussing how we can maximise utility in the presence of resource constraints: given some fixed resource pool, we should perhaps aim to support less than the maximal number of people with those resources, so that each can have a larger share of them.
IMO thereâs nothing wrong with this reasoning in itself, but it doesnât apply to the repugnant conclusion, because the repugnant conclusion operates at an entirely different level of abstraction, with no notion of (or interest in) what resource consumption is necessary to achieve the hypothetical alternatives it presents. Itâs purely a question of âsupposing these are the situations you have to choose between: one where there are a few people with very good experiences, and one where there are very many people with barely-good experiences, how do you make that decision?â Replying to this with âactually we should pick a medium-sized group of people with medium-good experiencesâ is like answering the trolley problem by saying âactually we should fit emergency brakes to trolleys so they donât hit anyoneâ. Itâs not wrong exactly, but it doesnât address the problems raised by the original argument.
It sounds like youâre discussing how we can maximise utility in the presence of resource constraints: given some fixed resource pool, we should perhaps aim to support less than the maximal number of people with those resources, so that each can have a larger share of them.
IMO thereâs nothing wrong with this reasoning in itself, but it doesnât apply to the repugnant conclusion, because the repugnant conclusion operates at an entirely different level of abstraction, with no notion of (or interest in) what resource consumption is necessary to achieve the hypothetical alternatives it presents. Itâs purely a question of âsupposing these are the situations you have to choose between: one where there are a few people with very good experiences, and one where there are very many people with barely-good experiences, how do you make that decision?â Replying to this with âactually we should pick a medium-sized group of people with medium-good experiencesâ is like answering the trolley problem by saying âactually we should fit emergency brakes to trolleys so they donât hit anyoneâ. Itâs not wrong exactly, but it doesnât address the problems raised by the original argument.