Message from @ETBrooD
Discord ID: 620566830754430996
Injustice, inequality, imbalance, and suffering as a result, it's part of life
But surely we can try minimise those injustices, inequality, imbalance and suffering 😉
For me it's about mitigating the cost on a moral individualistic level, not on a collective level
Well
What's the difference between two people dying or one person dying?
The utilitarian answer is: it's twice the cost because two is twice than one
My answer: no difference
Some people misunderstand what I mean by this
So let me explain
Please do
We can either place value on life, or we don't. If we place value on life, we can do this either by numbers of lives, or by the simple distinction between life and death.
Ergo we can say death is terrible just because it's death, or we can say death is more or less terrible depending on how many people die.
Fuck, I want to continue this, but I need to head out..
I only make a distinction between life and death, not between numbers of dead people.
Every single death is bad. More dead people are not more bad, they're just equally bad. It doesn't add up, it stays level.
so killing 1 baby is equal to killing a hundred?🤔
That’s what I was just typing
Yes, in my opinion it's the same. If you kill one, you could just as well kill a hundred, so you should be tried the same either way.
bruh
thats... an intresting way of looking at things
If that one death was violent and painful, would it be any different from the 100 deaths which may have been peaceful in their sleep?
If you deserve death for killing 100 babies, then you also deserve death for killing one.
If you don't deserve death for killing one baby, then you also don't deserve death for killing 100.
Makes communist death stats irrelevant
There's a difference between a murderer and a serial killer...
I know there's a difference, and I've thought about that
But to me it's purely numerical
A utilitarian sees added moral value in numbers, I don't
If you kill one person that's life, if you kill hundreds that's a death sentence
In this instance it might just depend on the person. I mean to you or me, we'd see the baby's death as a bad thing. To the parent, it's so much more devastating
I think if you murder 100 people, and you deserve death for that, then you should also deserve that for only murdering 1 person.
No I don't believe in death for killing one person as that's an eye for an eye territory which is morally questionable
That's the utilitarian morality
My morality is anti-utilitarian
Each individual counts
Surely it'd be better to make that person spend the rest of their life living with the consequences of their actions?
Death is too easy an escape
Well, that's how we've handled it so far
I see it more like this:
A serial killer is more likely to kill again, and that's why it makes pragmatic sense to kill him
True
But from a purely moralistic standpoint, there's no difference in my opinion
And since the world isn't purely moralistic, and utility matters, anti-utilitarian views are irrelevant.