I agree global health and development interventions can look better than animal welfare ones if one puts a sufficiently low weight on expectedtotalhedonisticutilitarianism.
I meant to say “sufficiently low weight on expected total hedonistic utilitarianism (ETHU) and maximising expected choiceworthiness (MEC)”.
Lots of worldviews that favor GHD will also favor projects to benefit the worst off (for various reasons).
Worldviews which favour helping the worse off will tend to support helping animals with negative lives (like caged hens) over saving human lives in low income countries? These human lives would arguably have to be positive to be worth saving. So people supporting GHD over animal welfare are neither helping the worst off nor maximising welfare, but rather strongly rejecting both ETHU and MEC?
Thanks, Hayley.
I meant to say “sufficiently low weight on expected total hedonistic utilitarianism (ETHU) and maximising expected choiceworthiness (MEC)”.
Worldviews which favour helping the worse off will tend to support helping animals with negative lives (like caged hens) over saving human lives in low income countries? These human lives would arguably have to be positive to be worth saving. So people supporting GHD over animal welfare are neither helping the worst off nor maximising welfare, but rather strongly rejecting both ETHU and MEC?