
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


Cross-posted from my website.
Epistemic status: This entire essay rests on two controversial premises (linear aggregation and antispeciesism) that I believe are quite robust, but I will not be able to convince anyone that they're true, so I'm not even going to try.
If welfare is important, and if the value of welfare scales something-like-linearly, and if there is nothing morally special about the human species[1], then these two things are probably also true:
(Historically, people referred to these beings as "hedonium". I dislike that term because hedonium sounds like a thing. It doesn't sound like something that matters. It's supposed to be the opposite of that—it's supposed to be the most profoundly innately valuable sentient being. So I think it's better to describe the beings as Welfareans. I [...]
The original text contained 2 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.
---
First published:
Source:
---
Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.
By EA Forum TeamCross-posted from my website.
Epistemic status: This entire essay rests on two controversial premises (linear aggregation and antispeciesism) that I believe are quite robust, but I will not be able to convince anyone that they're true, so I'm not even going to try.
If welfare is important, and if the value of welfare scales something-like-linearly, and if there is nothing morally special about the human species[1], then these two things are probably also true:
(Historically, people referred to these beings as "hedonium". I dislike that term because hedonium sounds like a thing. It doesn't sound like something that matters. It's supposed to be the opposite of that—it's supposed to be the most profoundly innately valuable sentient being. So I think it's better to describe the beings as Welfareans. I [...]
The original text contained 2 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.
---
First published:
Source:
---
Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.