I donât think this is significant. The use of the word âconsumptionâ is interchangeable with purchasing in economic contexts. The use of the word âmarginalâ is possibly superfluous. However, I think thereâs an interpretation that makes sense here, where an individual is increasing total suffering âat the marginâ by virtue of their consumption. That is, they are not responsible for the whole of the suffering, but the marginal increase in suffering caused by their personal consumption. The language is unclear, but I would not agree that it is a significant error (unless you consider unclarity or vagueness to be significant mistakes).
2-4 I agree with you. I particularly appreciate the point about ânaive vs. non-naiveâ.
Thanks for writing this.
I donât think this is significant. The use of the word âconsumptionâ is interchangeable with purchasing in economic contexts. The use of the word âmarginalâ is possibly superfluous. However, I think thereâs an interpretation that makes sense here, where an individual is increasing total suffering âat the marginâ by virtue of their consumption. That is, they are not responsible for the whole of the suffering, but the marginal increase in suffering caused by their personal consumption. The language is unclear, but I would not agree that it is a significant error (unless you consider unclarity or vagueness to be significant mistakes).
2-4 I agree with you. I particularly appreciate the point about ânaive vs. non-naiveâ.
cheers