• Girru00@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    You cant calculate net positive based on actuals, but also include opportunity cost, and regardless, simple utilitarianism is morally reprehensible imho. Someone invents the cure for all cancers, and only commits the occasional rape or murder. Net positive? Hero/villain?

    • I_Has_A_Hat@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’m a solid believer in utilitarianism, so yes, I’d say it’s a net positive. Hero/villain doesn’t come into it because those are meaningless words that only allow for a black and white view of things.

      Let’s say this person existed. Someone who literally created the cure for all cancers, but every 2 years they raped and murdered someone. Now let’s say you had a button that would wipe them from existence. Not kill them, wipe them from existence as if they had never been born. Would you push it?

      Keep in mind, if you don’t push it, there is nothing stopping people from holding them accountable and stopping their rapes/murders while still having the cancer cure. Meanwhile, if you do push it, a handful of people will be spared rape/murder, but humanity as a whole would lose the cure for cancer and you’d condemn not just millions of current people, but all those who could have benefited in the future. Hell, even if they were never held accountable they’ll still die eventually, but humanity would still have their cure.

      So, would you push it?