Image not available

667x627

d7192231ff586d3e0....jpg

๐Ÿงต Untitled Thread

Anonymous No. 16137205

Can anyone explain the repugnant conclusion to me.
I don't get why it's supposed to be repugnant.

Anonymous No. 16137220

Appeal to ethics is a cucking surrogate for a lack of power. If decision-makers rationalize whatever action benefits them the most then why would they care about a thought exercise that involves maximizing the total happiness of a population?

Anonymous No. 16137294

it doesn't really seem like a paradox to me, it relies on the idea that "it is better for an unhappy population to exist than to have never existed" which i really don't think is objectively true.