Great introductory video to the topic. It seems to me that in many of these thought experiments, there is an implication that not bringing someone into existence harms them. The fallacy of this is illustrated if we clean up the wording a bit: not bringing a non-existent person into existence cannot harm them, because they do not yet exist and never will if the non-person is never conceived and made into a person who can then experience harm, wrongdoing, frustration of desires, etc. So in the future phone example, this is assuming a sort of B Theory of time where the future is already happening simultaneously to our own timeframe, and there are future people already existing right now (in super-time) who we can call and ask for an opinion. I think a better thought experiment to begin tackling the non-identity problem would be this: You have two friends, Adam and Bill. For whatever reason, you can only buy one of them a birthday gift this year, despite the fact that you are superbly wealthy. As an additional catch, you have to buy a particular present for Adam. You can only buy Adam a pair of cheap shoes, which will be somewhat uncomfortable, might wear out quickly, and could give him orthopedic problems. For Bill though, you can get him a brand new Lamborghini with an excellent insurance policy. Neither one is expecting a gift from you, and neither will ever know if you got a present for the other one or what it is, so neither is at risk of experiencing any envy or disappointment. Either will be better off with a gift than without, but given the disparity in the quality of choices, it seems to me that the obvious answer is to give the Lamborghini to Bill.
> The fallacy of this is illustrated if we clean up the wording a bit: not bringing a non-existent person into existence cannot harm them, because they do not yet exist and never will if the non-person is never conceived and made into a person who can then experience harm, wrongdoing, frustration of desires, etc. But if something of genuine positive value can exist, shouldn't we try to bring people into existence for them to experience happiness? It's not going to be better for them, but we will increase genuine pleasure in the world.
Great introductory video to the topic.
It seems to me that in many of these thought experiments, there is an implication that not bringing someone into existence harms them.
The fallacy of this is illustrated if we clean up the wording a bit: not bringing a non-existent person into existence cannot harm them, because they do not yet exist and never will if the non-person is never conceived and made into a person who can then experience harm, wrongdoing, frustration of desires, etc.
So in the future phone example, this is assuming a sort of B Theory of time where the future is already happening simultaneously to our own timeframe, and there are future people already existing right now (in super-time) who we can call and ask for an opinion.
I think a better thought experiment to begin tackling the non-identity problem would be this:
You have two friends, Adam and Bill. For whatever reason, you can only buy one of them a birthday gift this year, despite the fact that you are superbly wealthy. As an additional catch, you have to buy a particular present for Adam.
You can only buy Adam a pair of cheap shoes, which will be somewhat uncomfortable, might wear out quickly, and could give him orthopedic problems.
For Bill though, you can get him a brand new Lamborghini with an excellent insurance policy.
Neither one is expecting a gift from you, and neither will ever know if you got a present for the other one or what it is, so neither is at risk of experiencing any envy or disappointment.
Either will be better off with a gift than without, but given the disparity in the quality of choices, it seems to me that the obvious answer is to give the Lamborghini to Bill.
> The fallacy of this is illustrated if we clean up the wording a bit: not bringing a non-existent person into existence cannot harm them, because they do not yet exist and never will if the non-person is never conceived and made into a person who can then experience harm, wrongdoing, frustration of desires, etc.
But if something of genuine positive value can exist, shouldn't we try to bring people into existence for them to experience happiness? It's not going to be better for them, but we will increase genuine pleasure in the world.
7:00 affordability$$$/existence,,,
12:00 policies