Executive summary: The author argues that if “incomparability” truly exists—meaning some goods or outcomes can’t be ranked as better, worse, or equal—then, combined with the vast ripple effects of our actions on future people, all actions become neither good nor bad, leading to moral nihilism; therefore, we should reject incomparability.
Key points:
The “ripple effect thesis” holds that every action changes who exists in the future and thus alters countless goods and bads, making all outcomes radically interdependent.
If some goods are incomparable—neither better nor worse—then even small actions (like driving to the store) swap out vast numbers of incomparable goods, rendering those actions neither good nor bad.
This neutrality extends to major moral acts like saving lives, since the incomparability of the affected goods overwhelms any finite benefit.
Attempts to ignore or discount unknown incomparable effects fail, as awareness of any single incomparable change collapses ordinary moral evaluation.
Deontological views don’t escape the problem, because incomparability also undermines reasons grounded in duty or love (e.g., calling your mother).
The only coherent forms of incomparability are those outside human influence—such as between infinite sets or divine creations—since applying it to human-affected goods yields moral nihilism.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, andcontact us if you have feedback.
Executive summary: The author argues that if “incomparability” truly exists—meaning some goods or outcomes can’t be ranked as better, worse, or equal—then, combined with the vast ripple effects of our actions on future people, all actions become neither good nor bad, leading to moral nihilism; therefore, we should reject incomparability.
Key points:
The “ripple effect thesis” holds that every action changes who exists in the future and thus alters countless goods and bads, making all outcomes radically interdependent.
If some goods are incomparable—neither better nor worse—then even small actions (like driving to the store) swap out vast numbers of incomparable goods, rendering those actions neither good nor bad.
This neutrality extends to major moral acts like saving lives, since the incomparability of the affected goods overwhelms any finite benefit.
Attempts to ignore or discount unknown incomparable effects fail, as awareness of any single incomparable change collapses ordinary moral evaluation.
Deontological views don’t escape the problem, because incomparability also undermines reasons grounded in duty or love (e.g., calling your mother).
The only coherent forms of incomparability are those outside human influence—such as between infinite sets or divine creations—since applying it to human-affected goods yields moral nihilism.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.