🤍
Morality
  • System of Morality
    • Definition of Ethics
    • Birth of Morality
    • Existence
    • Experience
    • Ethical Spectrum
    • Efficacy
  • Laws of Morality
    • There are only consequences
    • Ethics Probability & Uncertainty
    • Ethics Moral Responsibility or Obligation
  • Conclusions
    • Ethics Moral Absolute
    • Ethical Time Spectrum
    • Moral Community
    • Ethical Best
  • Suffering Risks
    • X-Risks
    • S-Risks
      • Introduction to suffering-focused ethics
      • Importance of Suffering & S-Risks
      • Solutions for S-risks
      • Questions
  • About
    • Contact
Powered by GitBook
On this page
  • Moral Frameworks of Suffering-focused Ethics
  • Suffering vs Positive Value (e.g,. happiness)
  1. Suffering Risks
  2. S-Risks

Introduction to suffering-focused ethics

Moral Frameworks of Suffering-focused Ethics

  • Strong Negative utilitarianism

    • Only concerned with minimizing suffering

  • Weak Negative Utilitarianism

    • Other names

      • ‘negative-leaning’, ‘partially asymmetric’, or ‘partially suffering-focused’

    • Suffering primarily, happiness secondarily

      • Suffering exchange rate > happiness exchange rate 1.x > 1.0

  • Negative consequentialism

    • includes suffering (experience) as well as injustice

  • Approach: Unacceptable Tradeoffs

    • Unacceptable to purchase positivity in exchange for negativity

      • To which degree?

        • Positivity for acceptable quality of life

        • Negativity from minor to death, intense suffering

  • How other views support suffering-focused ethics

    • Focus on well being: Implies preventing bad

    • Population Ethics with view that increasing population does not increase welfare: Implies preventing suffering

Suffering vs Positive Value (e.g,. happiness)

  • Urgency

    • Suffering has urgency

      • 'Emergency' is reduce suffering not happiness

      • moral monster,s evil actions

        • always about suffering not about failing to create positive values

      • Situation: Extreme Suffering + Extreme Good = Overall-bad

        • Should prevent whole situation

        • Impossible to counterbalance with good

    • Good has no urgency

      • Not increase seems wholly fine & unproblematic

    • Questions: Is this view from..

      • aversion to suffering?

        • Would be solved via equanimity

      • lack of sympathetic joy?

        • Would be solved via cultivating sympathethic joy?

      • intellectual perception rather than direct experience?

  • Good & Bad

    • Good: Flawless

      • Definition

        • No need to change anything

        • Cannot make it better

      • No spectrum

      • Moral Implication

        • No moral imperative to add anything/improve

      • Reality

        • rarely or never reach it

    • Bad: Flawed

      • Spectrum i.e., varies in degree

    • Approach to Morality

      • Reduce flawed. Not increase flawless

    • No experience that are a positive counterpart to suffering

      • e.g., positive final value, positive well-being

PreviousS-RisksNextImportance of Suffering & S-Risks

Last updated 9 months ago