I am in favour of the rights of the individual but this is intuitive rather than logical. So its not objectively morally right.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
I don't think it's intuitive because we are individuals.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @toxicpath
Then explain logically why its better to preserve one person than save six?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
because you can't decrease the well-being of one person to increase that of others.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
it is a logical argument if you define morality as avoiding decreases, or maximizing well-being of individuals
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @toxicpath
But you have to justify logically why that is the best premise.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
not really. It can include historical contrivances and just random luck. Logic has nothing to do with it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @toxicpath
OK, well you've now ruled out logic so you'll have to argue why its best to do that. Do you see my point? Many possible premises.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
I don't think there are many if you claim your goal is moral.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Then I have failed to show how different arguments would work for maximising wellbeing in different ways. Thought I was clear.
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.