Todays philosophical challenge: resolve the contradiction. Let 10 represent the greatest possible happiness for a human to experience, and let 0 represent the minimal amount of happiness for a human life to be worth living, and a smooth gradation along the intervening numbers. Now, suppose that there are three futures we could guarantee for the year 2200: Future A -- there are a billion people, all living lives at 7. Future B -- there are two billion people, all living lives at 6. Future C -- there are two billion people, with one billion living lives at 7 and the second billion living lives at 3.5. Problem: as I will argue if need be in the discussion that follows (should there be one!), A is all-things-considered better than B; B is all-things-considered better than C; and C is all-things-considered better than A. How can this paradox be resolved? *Note: I have deliberately excluded external matters like how we can get to these futures and what will happen in the aftermath of these futures. I did that deliberately in order to make clear that, even without those externalities, there seems to be a paradox in these outcomes _themselves_. So no digressions away from that, please! Not helpful or fair! Thanks.
Posted on: Thu, 07 Nov 2013 19:48:49 +0000