The article contrasts the philosophies of Thanos, a fictional character from the Marvel universe, and Derek Parfit, a real-life moral philosopher. Thanos believes in reducing population to improve the quality of life, whereas Parfit's utilitarian views led him to the "repugnant conclusion"—the idea that a larger population with minimal happiness can be preferable to a smaller one with greater happiness. David Edmonds discusses Parfit's struggles with this conclusion, which held significance throughout his career, highlighting the complexities of moral philosophy.
Thanos argued that it would be better to have fewer people enjoying more, rather than lots of people "enjoying" barely anything.
Parfit came to the opposite conclusion from Thanos, but he wasn't happy about it - his "repugnant conclusion" bothered him right until the end of his career.
His first principle in this case was the belief that a good action is one that creates the most happiness. A good world is one with the most overall happiness.
The repugnant conclusion is a kind of self-induced reductio ad absurdum where Parfit was forced to accept its arguments on the basis of certain first principles.
Collection
[
|
...
]