Why 100 Billion People is better - The Repugnant Conclusion

preview_player
Показать описание
Is a much larger population of people on Earth actually better for us? According to Derek Parfit's repugnant conclusion, it may lead to higher total happiness. This is the branch of philosophy known as population ethics.

In this animated philosophy video, we discuss utilitarianism, Nozick's utility monster and John Rawls' difference principle.

Written/VO by: KrisDissatisfied

Reference:
Peter Singer, 1986, Applied Ethics, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 145-164
Overpopulation and Quality of Life
Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

"All lives are worth living" is an assumption unsupported by evidence. "All lives on and Earth with 100 billion people are worth living" is completely unsupported by evidence of any kind.

dalegreer
Автор

Benatar has it right. Negative utilitarianism and antinatalism resolves this.

robh
Автор

Utter nonsense. People who breed should be imprisoned, not rewarded.

And does the sum total of GREATER suffering and unhappiness mean nothing to him?

winstonjen