I was thinking about the following analogy recently and wonder what fellow SS members think about it.
It seems like the most common argument supporting the pro life position against suicide is that one should strive to maximise the happiness or well being of the individuals affected by the act, and therefore it should not be considered acceptable because ultimately it may cause more suffering for all parties affected.
Utilitarianism is one of the first things taught to students taking an introductory philosophy class for the first time, and I think it's well known at this point that this is not a sound moral philosophy (and not even necessarily the closest to sound), a simple way to illustrate this I thought about was a thought experiment involving slavery.
It's likely that most people who are pro life are also anti slavery. But it is conceivable that slavery is justifiable operating under a utilitarian ethics system given we cherry pick some parameters, e.g. make it so that the average number of family members of each household employing slaves vastly out numbers the average number of employed slaves per household, so that in the absence of slavery although the overall well being of the slaves would increase, this increase in well being would not be greater than the overall decrease in well being of all family members of households employing slaves (even though it is from an emotional standpoint clear that on average the decrease in well being for a single family member would be vastly less than the increase for an average slave, the sheer number of family members per household can make this so).
Realistically this is not evidence that utilitarianism is a poor choice of moral philosophy, but it is proof that the argument made from its position is a poor one in the case of suicide, because we are in a very similar situation to the one I painted earlier excusing or allowing slavery, viewing each suicidal person as a slave and the household they serve as the set of people they could emotionally affect by committing suicide, it seems the only way the utilitarian position could go through is if the average number of affected vastly outnumbers the average number of suicidal people, which it well may, however this means by the exact same argument, in my absurd slavery scenario, pro lifers will need to admit slavery is justified or at least acceptable.
It seems like the most common argument supporting the pro life position against suicide is that one should strive to maximise the happiness or well being of the individuals affected by the act, and therefore it should not be considered acceptable because ultimately it may cause more suffering for all parties affected.
Utilitarianism is one of the first things taught to students taking an introductory philosophy class for the first time, and I think it's well known at this point that this is not a sound moral philosophy (and not even necessarily the closest to sound), a simple way to illustrate this I thought about was a thought experiment involving slavery.
It's likely that most people who are pro life are also anti slavery. But it is conceivable that slavery is justifiable operating under a utilitarian ethics system given we cherry pick some parameters, e.g. make it so that the average number of family members of each household employing slaves vastly out numbers the average number of employed slaves per household, so that in the absence of slavery although the overall well being of the slaves would increase, this increase in well being would not be greater than the overall decrease in well being of all family members of households employing slaves (even though it is from an emotional standpoint clear that on average the decrease in well being for a single family member would be vastly less than the increase for an average slave, the sheer number of family members per household can make this so).
Realistically this is not evidence that utilitarianism is a poor choice of moral philosophy, but it is proof that the argument made from its position is a poor one in the case of suicide, because we are in a very similar situation to the one I painted earlier excusing or allowing slavery, viewing each suicidal person as a slave and the household they serve as the set of people they could emotionally affect by committing suicide, it seems the only way the utilitarian position could go through is if the average number of affected vastly outnumbers the average number of suicidal people, which it well may, however this means by the exact same argument, in my absurd slavery scenario, pro lifers will need to admit slavery is justified or at least acceptable.
