Right, I agree that's important. So it's what people selfishly want wrt population ethics.
-
-
i'm closer to a "list of good things" utilitarian than a preference utilitarian, though, anyway
-
but i'm not really a utilitarian because just as value of life isn't sum of values of observer-moments,
-
value of set of lives isn't the sum of values of lives. OR EVEN any function of those values at all
-
i tend to disagree w critiques of utilitarianism that take the form "no use a different function than the sum"
-
like, i think the function that comes closest is probably something like the sum. but it isn't a function
-
Sum isn't close, because sum is unbounded, and thus expected value can be undefined.
-
measure-weighted sum then
-
What? I would say use f∘sum, where f:ℝ→[0,1] is monotonic, but it doesn't sound like you're describing that.
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
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.