The Happies were overwhelmed by empathic suffering due to their...
Even if we forget that and assume they wanted to give us direct empathy right away, their first thought wouldn’t be...
For the first two paragraphs, are we assuming that the Super Happies are positive utilitarians in a moral sense? (which is to say, facilitating increase in pleasure among others is a moral per-requisite, and anybody who disagrees is wrong?)
The Baby Eaters want to feel pain when they eat their children, whom they love. It’s part of the great noble sacrifice for the group...
Touche
That’s very sensible if you’re interested in cooperation. If however you’re fleeing from monsters, putting your species in stasis is a tactical disadvantage.
The Super Happies would have flooded into the human star network if Akon said no, and the changes would have been forced regardless of any tactical advantage preserved by not cooperating with stasis. At the very least, asking the Kiritsugu to put Humanity in stasis after they’ve lost while the treaty is being drawn up would allow whatever changes made to be be gradual and performed in the right order.
This was kind of addressed too. The Happies say, “That matters less to our values than to yours”
The substance of her statement didn’t seem anything more than “We don’t care about what your preferences are, even though the justification of our intervention is that you adults don’t respond to the preferences of your children.” In fact, that line of reasoning was only saved from refutation by the Kiritsugu’s appeal to the fact that children didn’t share the adult’s choice in choosing pain over pleasure based on abstracts. I don’t think it does address the problem.
For the first two paragraphs, are we assuming that the Super Happies are positive utilitarians in a moral sense? (which is to say, facilitating increase in pleasure among others is a moral per-requisite, and anybody who disagrees is wrong?)
Touche
The Super Happies would have flooded into the human star network if Akon said no, and the changes would have been forced regardless of any tactical advantage preserved by not cooperating with stasis. At the very least, asking the Kiritsugu to put Humanity in stasis after they’ve lost while the treaty is being drawn up would allow whatever changes made to be be gradual and performed in the right order.
The substance of her statement didn’t seem anything more than “We don’t care about what your preferences are, even though the justification of our intervention is that you adults don’t respond to the preferences of your children.” In fact, that line of reasoning was only saved from refutation by the Kiritsugu’s appeal to the fact that children didn’t share the adult’s choice in choosing pain over pleasure based on abstracts. I don’t think it does address the problem.