One issue with the scenario as set up by Parfit is that it assumes the resources most important for human life are those which exist independently of the population (so there is some zero sum distribution going on). Whereas there are a lot of things important to utility that are positively correlated with the population (even if we ignore economies of scale in using resources there are ideas, entertainment, social interaction etc. that increase with the population). If I recall the studies on correlates of happiness (And Lukeprog’s posts) well it might mean that we are obliged to tile the universe with people with happy personal lives and personally fulfilling jobs, to the extent that can be done using the minimum resources per person.
In summary I suppose I’m agreeing with your conclusion that it is about efficiency, but possibly population increase would be more efficient.
Very good article.
One issue with the scenario as set up by Parfit is that it assumes the resources most important for human life are those which exist independently of the population (so there is some zero sum distribution going on). Whereas there are a lot of things important to utility that are positively correlated with the population (even if we ignore economies of scale in using resources there are ideas, entertainment, social interaction etc. that increase with the population). If I recall the studies on correlates of happiness (And Lukeprog’s posts) well it might mean that we are obliged to tile the universe with people with happy personal lives and personally fulfilling jobs, to the extent that can be done using the minimum resources per person.
In summary I suppose I’m agreeing with your conclusion that it is about efficiency, but possibly population increase would be more efficient.