It sounds like the decision most consistent with your stated values is to simply make yourself miserable. “Because otherwise I’d be a bit less happy” is an unsatisfactory response to why someone should die.
I think this is a troubling idea but am unaware of any very good response. It seems that, for the conventionalist, there is no such thing as supererogation. Obviously making yourself too unhappy will cause burnout, but I’m not sure that really addresses the core issue.
Yes, obveously you should avoid burning out, on instrumental grounds if nothing else. But it’s plausible there is still a wide gulf between what we actually do, and what our values require of us, even after taking that into account. You don’t need that many luxuries.
Have you actually tried living in the US on as little as Jeff Kaufman and Julia Wise while still making as much money as them, or are you just spewing out cached thoughts?
This also applies to (say) the choice of where to live. You can donate more if you earn $60,000 a year and spend $20,000 on yourself than if you earn $30,000 a year and spend $10,000 on yourself. In general, if spending $1 on yourself increases your earning potential by at least $2, you should do so even if you’re completely selfless and the only thing you terminally value is how much money gets donated.
It sounds like the decision most consistent with your stated values is to simply make yourself miserable. “Because otherwise I’d be a bit less happy” is an unsatisfactory response to why someone should die.
I think this is a troubling idea but am unaware of any very good response. It seems that, for the conventionalist, there is no such thing as supererogation. Obviously making yourself too unhappy will cause burnout, but I’m not sure that really addresses the core issue.
If you’re burned out, how are you going to save people?
Yes, obveously you should avoid burning out, on instrumental grounds if nothing else. But it’s plausible there is still a wide gulf between what we actually do, and what our values require of us, even after taking that into account. You don’t need that many luxuries.
This applies to many altruists, but I don’t think it applies to jkaufman. See here.
Have you actually tried living in the US on as little as Jeff Kaufman and Julia Wise while still making as much money as them, or are you just spewing out cached thoughts?
This also applies to (say) the choice of where to live. You can donate more if you earn $60,000 a year and spend $20,000 on yourself than if you earn $30,000 a year and spend $10,000 on yourself. In general, if spending $1 on yourself increases your earning potential by at least $2, you should do so even if you’re completely selfless and the only thing you terminally value is how much money gets donated.