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