To me it seems rather obvious that we should jettison number 3. There is no excuse for creating more suffering under any circumstances. The ones who walked away from Omelas were right to do so. I suppose this makes me a negative utilitarian, but I think, along with David Pearce, that the total elimination of suffering is entirely possible, and desirable. (Actually, reading Noosphere89′s comment, I think it makes me a deontologist. But then, I’ve been meaning to make a “Why I no longer identify as a consequentialist” post for a while now...)
To me it seems rather obvious that we should jettison number 3. There is no excuse for creating more suffering under any circumstances. The ones who walked away from Omelas were right to do so. I suppose this makes me a negative utilitarian, but I think, along with David Pearce, that the total elimination of suffering is entirely possible, and desirable. (Actually, reading Noosphere89′s comment, I think it makes me a deontologist. But then, I’ve been meaning to make a “Why I no longer identify as a consequentialist” post for a while now...)