Hi Passio, I'm confused; why, in a review of a book, would I discuss some other random view that isn't the topic of the book? I don't think this is the appropriate forum for your complaint.
As you note, I do prominently discuss the importance of reducing suffering. For the record, I'm fine with prioritarian-like views that weight suffer…
Hi Passio, I'm confused; why, in a review of a book, would I discuss some other random view that isn't the topic of the book? I don't think this is the appropriate forum for your complaint.
As you note, I do prominently discuss the importance of reducing suffering. For the record, I'm fine with prioritarian-like views that weight suffering slightly more than positive benefits; I don't see that it makes a huge difference. If you go too far -- to the point that extinction becomes preferable to an imperfectly happy future -- then I think the view is completely insane, so I doubt you'd like the results if I were to discuss it more. (I think many of the dismissals cited in your link are well warranted; I wrote one of them.)
Finally, I don't think that "building a morally exploratory world" requires positively giving resources to views one finds evil or repugnant. You're welcome to develop your views and make your case (on your own website), but you're not *entitled* to others' support; you have to earn it by actually persuading them of the merits of your view. But again, this post is not the place for that; to deter hijacking, I'll be deleting any further comments in this vein.
Hi Passio, I'm confused; why, in a review of a book, would I discuss some other random view that isn't the topic of the book? I don't think this is the appropriate forum for your complaint.
As you note, I do prominently discuss the importance of reducing suffering. For the record, I'm fine with prioritarian-like views that weight suffering slightly more than positive benefits; I don't see that it makes a huge difference. If you go too far -- to the point that extinction becomes preferable to an imperfectly happy future -- then I think the view is completely insane, so I doubt you'd like the results if I were to discuss it more. (I think many of the dismissals cited in your link are well warranted; I wrote one of them.)
Finally, I don't think that "building a morally exploratory world" requires positively giving resources to views one finds evil or repugnant. You're welcome to develop your views and make your case (on your own website), but you're not *entitled* to others' support; you have to earn it by actually persuading them of the merits of your view. But again, this post is not the place for that; to deter hijacking, I'll be deleting any further comments in this vein.