"Wow, you wouldn't pass a law to prevent kids from riding bicycles?? You know 100 kids a year die from bicycle use - and you'd sacrifice their lives for what, just so some other kids can have a little fun? I can't believe you place such low value on the lives of children."
-
-
How many yearly fatalities would it be worth to have everyone innately recognize that it's a bad argument?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I don't know anyone who doesn't have deontological barriers against certain types/scales of trade offs. Even the most ardent utilitarians subscribe to certain deontological barriers they just rationalize it as some intangible cultural benefit or "moral hazard"
-
Arguing that certain deontological barriers are misplaced or inconsistent with a wider principle is fine. Pure utilitarianism is a myth. There's always a subjective base preference. If you haven't found deontological barriers in your own morality you haven't looked hard enough.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
It seems like a question of degrees. If we benchmarked at the Value of a Statistical Life, ~$10m., is that too high? We are, after all, speaking of statistical outcomes. I am ignoring the people who find such math to be understandably distasteful.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.