just simply, shouldn't we measure impact by averages, rather than in an additive way? i.e. what is the mean wellbeing of people, instead of adding up everyone's wellbeing scores out of 10.
The former encourages making people happy, the latter making happy people.
The thing you're looking to maximise is the happiness of people, rather than the abstract of "happiness". The latter treats humans as just vessels to carry this "happiness" around in the world, rather than something which is worthwhile because of the effect that it has on people.
If you're maximising making happy people then surely you would also be for having as many children as possible, against abortion etc. (talking about welfare of "the unborn" is also...uncomfortable.)
just simply, shouldn't we measure impact by averages, rather than in an additive way? i.e. what is the mean wellbeing of people, instead of adding up everyone's wellbeing scores out of 10.
The former encourages making people happy, the latter making happy people.
The thing you're looking to maximise is the happiness of people, rather than the abstract of "happiness". The latter treats humans as just vessels to carry this "happiness" around in the world, rather than something which is worthwhile because of the effect that it has on people.
If you're maximising making happy people then surely you would also be for having as many children as possible, against abortion etc. (talking about welfare of "the unborn" is also...uncomfortable.)