According to a utilitarian framework, whether it was right to send Elspeth to be tortured depends on Addy’s estimate of the probability that the Jane-lite power proves useful, and the relative values of survival and avoiding torture. To a utilitarian, Addy’s motive (increasing her own power and maintaining social dominance over Elspeth) is irrelevant.
Addy did not bother to make that estimate. To that extent, her motive may be relevant, mayn’t it?
An approximation of that estimate is encoded in the belief that having more power is better than having less (and in particular, the degree to which that is so). Not necessarily a good estimate, but at least an estimate. And besides, Addy’s motive is only relevant to the question of whether she’s good or evil (already answered by the fact that she eats people), not to the question of whether her decision was right or wrong.
If you mean “the question of whether her decision was right or wrong” independent of Addy’s mental state, then why do you say it depends on “Addy’s estimate of the probability that the Jane-lite power proves useful” rather than depending on the usefulness of the Jane-lite power?
It seems odd to take Addy’s mental state into account with one hand and ignore it with the other.
But the characters in the story aren’t debating whether her decision was or was not possible to justify under a utilitarian framework. They’re reacting to the (new-to-them) knowledge that she’s evil, and they get that by observing the carelessness with which she coerces a child into experiencing torture.
You might think that they should have already known that Addy’s evil, but of course Jake has previously been under magical influence leading him to like and make excuses for the Volturi (including Addy), and Maggie is probably not inclined to write a vampire off as evil “just” because they murder people, since she spent a great deal of time doing exactly that herself.
Addy did not bother to make that estimate. To that extent, her motive may be relevant, mayn’t it?
An approximation of that estimate is encoded in the belief that having more power is better than having less (and in particular, the degree to which that is so). Not necessarily a good estimate, but at least an estimate. And besides, Addy’s motive is only relevant to the question of whether she’s good or evil (already answered by the fact that she eats people), not to the question of whether her decision was right or wrong.
Now you’ve confused me.
If you mean “the question of whether her decision was right or wrong” independent of Addy’s mental state, then why do you say it depends on “Addy’s estimate of the probability that the Jane-lite power proves useful” rather than depending on the usefulness of the Jane-lite power?
It seems odd to take Addy’s mental state into account with one hand and ignore it with the other.
But the characters in the story aren’t debating whether her decision was or was not possible to justify under a utilitarian framework. They’re reacting to the (new-to-them) knowledge that she’s evil, and they get that by observing the carelessness with which she coerces a child into experiencing torture.
You might think that they should have already known that Addy’s evil, but of course Jake has previously been under magical influence leading him to like and make excuses for the Volturi (including Addy), and Maggie is probably not inclined to write a vampire off as evil “just” because they murder people, since she spent a great deal of time doing exactly that herself.