if we're being utilitarians and discussing "value," , one ought to understand this as an empirical question, and the fact is any economist could glance at this situation and say "looks like most people have lexicographic preferences. next question"
else you're disputing taste
else you're disputing taste
https://twitter.com/morallawwithin/status/1948144845559669215
the presumption of utilitarians in imposing their preferences on others as an objective reality is their second-most repellent trait
anyway: lexicographic preferences over humans and shrimp, with humans as the primary good, doesn't mean that shrimp have "no value." allow the marginal value of any shrimp to be positive; save all you like!
it just means one won't trade a human to save any number of shrimp
it just means one won't trade a human to save any number of shrimp
and lexicographic preferences absolutely are "rational," incidentally. complete, transitive, and reflexive.
are they "evil" in this case? we've established that a person with lexicographic preferences over shrimp values shrimp! they'll "save" shrimp, ceteris paribus
are they "evil" in this case? we've established that a person with lexicographic preferences over shrimp values shrimp! they'll "save" shrimp, ceteris paribus
and consider: the contrived scenario in @morallawwithin's paper is too limited. let's broaden it in another direction
first, you now have lexicographic preferences over three goods: humans, shrimp, and--let's say ladybugs; denote H, S, L with H>>S>>L
first, you now have lexicographic preferences over three goods: humans, shrimp, and--let's say ladybugs; denote H, S, L with H>>S>>L
https://x.com/DrInquisitivus/status/1948171755945943528?t=glmPGGo36mhVLK27Rmm0EA&s=19
@morallawwithin and now we introduce another question: would you sacrifice a single shrimp to save 10^100 ladybugs?
the man with these preferences would say no! all ladybugs must go to save the life of one shrimp!
the man with these preferences would say no! all ladybugs must go to save the life of one shrimp!
@morallawwithin the subject of this second dilemma, viewed in isolation, might be construed by a utilitarian using the actual paper's logic to be "overvaluing" shrimp lives in treating so many ladybug lives as "worthless"
@morallawwithin but he is the SAME MAN with the SAME PREFERENCES as the one who condemned 10^100 shrimp to death to save a single human!
so which is it? is he a shrimp idolizer or a shrimp hitler? are these shrimp, in an absolute utilitarian calculus, over- or under-valued?
so which is it? is he a shrimp idolizer or a shrimp hitler? are these shrimp, in an absolute utilitarian calculus, over- or under-valued?
i'll pause here to wait for a response but in the mean time, i have a reading recommendation for philosophy doctoral students inclined to utilitarianism
first two chapters should have you covered
amzn.to/3H1xe0n
first two chapters should have you covered
amzn.to/3H1xe0n
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
