nessus@mit-eddie.UUCP (Doug Alan) (07/11/83)
From: Alan Wexlblat ... Another form of the GR says "Do unto others as they would like to be done unto." Does this say that we must whip the masochist who begs for the favor? Should we go out and purchase drugs for the addict? Again, the GR falls apart. I see nothing wrong with whipping the masochist. Some people watch TV and some people like to be whipped.... About the addict: I'm sure that the addict has conflicting desires. He wants the drugs, but he also wants to stay alive and healthy. The good thing to do would probably be to help him satisfy his desire to stay alive and healthy rather than his desire to do drugs, because his desire to live and be healthy seems more important, even if it seems less urgent to him at the moment. ... Imagine, if you will, a group of perfect altruists: for each of them, the best that they can do is satisfying the desires of another of them. BUT, all of them are in the same position; all desire to fulfill the desires of another. But none of them have any desires of their own! This leads us to the conclusion (which I beleive is inevitable) that there can be no moral goods if there are no non-moral goods before them. I see no problem here. It's obvious that the world is already in pretty good shape. There must not be any hunger, thirst, or exposure, or just by the physical nature of man, there would be desires to be satisfied. There just is no good to be done here. The state of the world in this situation must have the highest goodness rating possible (for a world in which everyone is stupid and has no imagination -- if they weren't stupid or had some imagination, they'd all think of something they want to do). -- Doug Alan decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!nessus Nessus@MIT-MC