“Barely worth living” is, by modern western standards, really awful. [...]
I am very uncertain about where the “barely worth living” threshold is. The best self-introspecting question I can think of to try to get a handle on it is:
Would you rather vividly dream (including all physical pleasures and pains) a day at random in the person’s life, or have a dreamless night of sleep?
From your description I guess that this life lies substantially below the threshold (indeed many lives today may be, even in affluent societies). Note that a life which is ‘not worth living’ for the intrinsic value could easily be worth living for the instrumental values of helping others and leaving a better world behind than without the life.
The debate about the zero level is interesting—Anders told me his zero is lower than I described, that you can get worse and still have a life worth living.
Your idea has merit, but the hedonistic treadmill is a problem—people would not want to dream a life much worse than their own, whatever the absolute value of it.
I am very uncertain about where the “barely worth living” threshold is. The best self-introspecting question I can think of to try to get a handle on it is:
Would you rather vividly dream (including all physical pleasures and pains) a day at random in the person’s life, or have a dreamless night of sleep?
From your description I guess that this life lies substantially below the threshold (indeed many lives today may be, even in affluent societies). Note that a life which is ‘not worth living’ for the intrinsic value could easily be worth living for the instrumental values of helping others and leaving a better world behind than without the life.
The debate about the zero level is interesting—Anders told me his zero is lower than I described, that you can get worse and still have a life worth living.
Your idea has merit, but the hedonistic treadmill is a problem—people would not want to dream a life much worse than their own, whatever the absolute value of it.