AGENDA
- Ethics minor/spring classes
- Recap of Hardin
- Toby Ord
Garrett Hardin Recap
 |
| Scientific American |
- Assumption: very high population is bad
- Prediction: population will keep increasing FALSE!
- Diagnosis: tragedy of the common (Hardin)
- ethics won't work
- need coercion (mutually agreed upon)
- there are no other possibilities FALSE!
Why is population leveling off?
- lower infant mortality --> people have fewer children
- new opportunities for women
- contraception
- prosperity
Toby Ord, "Overpopulation or Underpopulation?"
Main points
- We should look at COSTS of more people but also BENEFITS
- What are the benefits?
- More people can add instrumental goods
- they are beneficial TO other people
- Instrumental goods: material (a hammer)
- more people --> need more material goods (so that's a cost)
- Instrumental goods: informational (a song)
- more people --> more information producers (songs, books, ideas)
- more people --> more information consumers benefiting
- More people can add intrinsic goods--"joy, love, excitement, contentment, etc." (p. 5)
- We should not overlook the benefits and just focus on the costs of higher population
Workbook--
- Ord says the 2 billion people world is better in a way. Agree or disagree?
- Will a future world of 10 billion be better than the present world of 8 billion in some ways?
The plot thickens (we didn't cover this material)
- Total Utilitarianism: total good is all that matters (the view Ord favors)
- Which future is best? High
- What is bad or puzzling about thinking about population this way?
- Average Utilitarianism: average good is all that matters
- Which future is best? Medium
- What is bad or puzzling about thinking about population this way?
- Existence Utilitarianism: ethics tells us to make people happy, not to make happy people
- Which future is best? The one that's best for people who exist now. (which is that?)
- What is bad or puzzling about thinking about population this way?