• Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 months ago

      I fail to see how the mere concept makes sense right now. That’s the same flawed logic as longtermists use.

      • retrieval4558
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        If my understanding of longtermism is correct, it’s more of a function of utilitarianism. If one wants to do the most good for the most people, then it makes some amount of sense to focus on the far future where presumably there will be more people. Their consent is irrelevant, which is kind of the opposite of what I’m saying, which is that consent is relevant.

        • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          It’s the other side of the same coin. They both argue about the well-being/bad-being of hypothetical humans. It’s bogus, either way.

          • F04118F@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I think you make a great point. Have you read about the problems with “person-affecting views”? It’s admittedly a bit harder to grasp, but doesn’t seem less problematic to me.

          • retrieval4558
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            They are not related because you have to exist to experience well-being or “bad-being”. What I’m talking about is consenting to exist.

            • Prunebutt@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              2 months ago

              Longtermists try to justify their actions by invoking potential, future generations. Those don’t exist either.

              • retrieval4558
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 months ago

                They’re presuming that people will exist, which is not a wild assumption

                But that’s not a philosophy I particularly subscribe to so I don’t feel compelled to explain or defend it further.