According to act utilitarianism (AU), for any morally significant choice, we ought to select the act available to us that will generate the greatest net utility compared to any other feasible act; or if more than one act will produce a set of results each of which has equal status in terms of the greatest net utility, then we should opt for one of those acts. In other words, we should choose whatever course of action will produce the best overall results in terms of usefulness, pleasure, desire-satisfaction, etc. (depending on how the utilitarian defines ‘utility’).
In a nutshell, we ought always to act optimifically. In doing so, the optimific end justifies whatever means are used to attain it.
Now, suppose that the current reports of UFO (UAP) sightings are explained by intelligent entities from other planets visiting ours. Suppose further that these beings plan to use us as mere means to their ends (e.g., for food, entertainment, general enslavement), and that doing so would – given their vast numbers and/or great capacity for pleasure, etc. – produce the greatest net utility despite being deleterious for us and violating our moral rights not to be used in such a manner.
If AU is true, the aliens would be morally obligated to exploit us for food, etc. and we would be obligated to allow ourselves to be exploited in this way. But this seems morally absurd, which suggests that AU is false. If your moral intuition indicates that such exploitation would be wrong, then you have good reason to reject AU.
I call this the No Cookbook! objection to AU. I get the name from the classic Twilight Zone episode To Serve Man. (Season 3, Episode 24, 1962)
Comments
No posts