Is this anything more than pointing out that Parfit’s argument, as generally discussed, doesn’t model resource constraints?
Are we assuming that he has never responded to this before? That this materially changes his conclusions?
At least in the wikipedia article, the lack of resource constraint was immediately obvious to me, but I don’t think it materially changes the conclusions.
Solve for dU+/dN < 0, where
U+=Total Utilons for person with net positive life (are some people only counting utilons above T+?),
N = Number of persons,
R = Resources,
T+ = Utilon threshold for positive life,
U = Total Utilons,
u = personal utilons.
We could come up with a first order analysis of this.
When doing the analysis, let’s note that people don’t just consume resources, but produce them as well.
Yes, adding in resource constraint probably makes the average level higher, but I don’t think anywhere near my current modest lifestyle. With any personal utilon function of resource use with a humanly accurate decreasing marginal utility, much of the resources I consume would have greater marginal utility for someone with u~T+.
So in the end, I think a “repugnant enough” conclusion stands. We’re all a little above subsistence.
Is this anything more than pointing out that Parfit’s argument, as generally discussed, doesn’t model resource constraints?
Are we assuming that he has never responded to this before? That this materially changes his conclusions?
At least in the wikipedia article, the lack of resource constraint was immediately obvious to me, but I don’t think it materially changes the conclusions.
Solve for dU+/dN < 0, where U+=Total Utilons for person with net positive life (are some people only counting utilons above T+?), N = Number of persons, R = Resources, T+ = Utilon threshold for positive life, U = Total Utilons, u = personal utilons.
We could come up with a first order analysis of this.
When doing the analysis, let’s note that people don’t just consume resources, but produce them as well.
Yes, adding in resource constraint probably makes the average level higher, but I don’t think anywhere near my current modest lifestyle. With any personal utilon function of resource use with a humanly accurate decreasing marginal utility, much of the resources I consume would have greater marginal utility for someone with u~T+.
So in the end, I think a “repugnant enough” conclusion stands. We’re all a little above subsistence.