First, the fact that others have declared it “mandatory” doesn’t exempt you from moral choices. There are always options. Second, there are a lot of different ways one might answer those questions. You don’t define what “good” is (maximize conscious population? Maximize average or peak satisfaction? Improve standing of one culture, even if an opposing culture has more members? Whatever your metric, do you maximize a point-in-time or integrate over some timespan?), and this is necessary to guide your decisions.
One possible framing for these questions:
Are there armies in any time in history in which individuals should have served in the military to do the most good inexpected global utility? If so, what seems to be the criteria?
I’d argue that most members of the winning side in a fight believe they did the best thing by fighting. If you think technological progress and higher density of humans on earth is good, then soldiers from more “civilized” cultures did best by killing and taking over the less-so. If you think your military opponents are doing more harm than would be done by opposing them, and that there are no less-harmful ways to get them to stop, then fighting is clearly the best option.
What are some possible implication of increasing/decreasing Israeli’s millitary power?
Anything from world peace to total annihalition. Probably neither of those, but just a slight increase in length of conflict and slight increase in probability that Israel wins. Do keep in mind the possibility that you could WEAKEN the military by joining it (intentionally or un-), which may change the way this answer affects your decision.
Even if I conclude that Israel is a force for good (or for evil) in the world, am I likely to think so 20 (50) years from now?
Your beliefs in 20/50/200 years will differ greatly from your beliefs today. But today is the single best predictor you have. If you know what direction your beliefs will shift in, you should probably just apply the Aumann theorem to yourself and shift them now.
Should I expect a random EA who has done some ammount of (non-combatant) militry service to regret the actions she has done?
I don’t recommend regret. Everyone makes mistakes, from believing falsehoods to failing to execute plans. I would remove the “non-combatant” proviso here, for two reasons—if you join the military, the chance that you’ll see combat increases greatly. Whether you actually pull the trigger or only sign the paperwork for shipping goods to a base, you’re enabling the combat.
First, the fact that others have declared it “mandatory” doesn’t exempt you from moral choices. There are always options. Second, there are a lot of different ways one might answer those questions. You don’t define what “good” is (maximize conscious population? Maximize average or peak satisfaction? Improve standing of one culture, even if an opposing culture has more members? Whatever your metric, do you maximize a point-in-time or integrate over some timespan?), and this is necessary to guide your decisions.
One possible framing for these questions:
I’d argue that most members of the winning side in a fight believe they did the best thing by fighting. If you think technological progress and higher density of humans on earth is good, then soldiers from more “civilized” cultures did best by killing and taking over the less-so. If you think your military opponents are doing more harm than would be done by opposing them, and that there are no less-harmful ways to get them to stop, then fighting is clearly the best option.
Anything from world peace to total annihalition. Probably neither of those, but just a slight increase in length of conflict and slight increase in probability that Israel wins. Do keep in mind the possibility that you could WEAKEN the military by joining it (intentionally or un-), which may change the way this answer affects your decision.
Your beliefs in 20/50/200 years will differ greatly from your beliefs today. But today is the single best predictor you have. If you know what direction your beliefs will shift in, you should probably just apply the Aumann theorem to yourself and shift them now.
I don’t recommend regret. Everyone makes mistakes, from believing falsehoods to failing to execute plans. I would remove the “non-combatant” proviso here, for two reasons—if you join the military, the chance that you’ll see combat increases greatly. Whether you actually pull the trigger or only sign the paperwork for shipping goods to a base, you’re enabling the combat.