career guidance... again

[Ruairi]

sorry i know i posted before but i dunno who else can point me in the right direction.

so im 17, i love dancing, rescue, adventuring, the wilderness, love, and above all making the most happiness i can and stopping the most suffering i can, in 2 years if i want to go to college ill be filling out the form for which course i want to do.

so whats most imporatant to me is making the most happiness i can and stopping the most suffering i can

so for that i need to know what can suffer and what can be happy

im researching about insects at the moment but ive read people saying they can and others who say they cant and im really kinda confused.

then if insects can suffer theres absolutely loads of them living in the wild who maybe suffer a lot but maybe that suffering is neccesary?

but then what ive been thinking lately whatever i eat and do thsoe resources have to come from somewhere and they wont be available for some other animal, surely whatever i do im taking from something

then once i know what can suffer and what can be happy i think i need to learn and know about all the things causing major suffering and happiness, this course looks cool but doesnt include animals which is a massive part of what i need to learn about http://www.ucc.ie/en/study/undergrad/wh ... oodpolicy/

i think id burn out in a "get rich and give" job and id prefer not to be what id feel is kinda just taking money from people when they could be convinced to donate it instead and also i have very very serious doubts about how possible it actually is to get into one of these jobs.

i think humans are basically good (maybe niavely) and that when they're inspired and educated they'll come to utilitarian conclusions so i think education is vital and i like debating and im good at it and politics has always interested me and because i live in ireland (it seems unlikely i could get elected in a country im not native to) its not too hard to get elected because its small and i could change policy and educate people because i could become a listened to public figure and also theres oppourtunity to make change at a european and global level and to influence the leaders of other countries.

(obviously im not garunteed any job in politics so id work in rescue before or if i didnt get elected)

but i dunno, i imagine myself leading a revolution in a poor country more than as a politician,

but to know if thats whats really needed i need to know first like i was saying:


1: what beings can suffer and what beings can be happy? (insects?, etc)

2: what are all things causing major happiness and suffering (wild animal suffering really possible to stop?, etc)

3: where can i learn about the above

4: however i live am i denying other beings the things i consume? (food, etc)

sorry for rambling completely and any advice on what you think i should do with my life would be great thanks

EDIT: also where is the evidence that more direct benifitters arn't needed also?

[RyanCarey]

I know you've already read the other relevant threads, Ruairi, but for everyone else's sake, here they are: College for a Utilitarian
Utilitarian Careers

> Don't rush! You've still got two years to decide. That's a long time. If you don't know yet, that's ok. I certainly didn't!
> Back then, I did know something though. I knew that eventually, I would decide what I wanted to do. And I wanted to have as many options as possible for that moment. Wanting that freedom was enough to drive me to work hard. In the end, I was so grateful that I had worked hard, because I needed every mark I could find to get into medicine: Good marks keep your options open!

Since you care about happiness and suffering, though, we should get more specific. Lots of people who are smarter than me have looked into this in more detail than me. Noone knows for sure, but so many people believe in getting money and donating it... I can see how you feel reluctant about making lots of money. If I were you, I would think about where that feeling comes from. Analysing your strongly held beliefs is a wonderful thing. Sometimes it's tough. You have to be patient - you may not find the answers straight away - but it's usually helpful in the long run.

[Brian Tomasik]

Adding to RyanCarey's comments, I think making money can be a good idea because it keeps your options open (just like earning good grades does while you're in school). If you make money and then change your mind about your life course, you haven't wasted your time, but if you spend years training for a subject area that you later decide is inefficient to study, then you have wasted that time. Making money gives you more time to decide. However, this doesn't mean you should necessarily intend to be a professional donor for life unless that approach suits you.

Your questions about animals are dead-on with my own thoughts on the matter. I have a page of references to research articles on the question of insect sentience, although you're right that the topic demands further study. I completely agree that the huge number of insects pushes this issue near the top of the priority list.

That said, because I doubt insects have lives worth living, I don't think it's necessarily bad to kill them (especially if we can do it less painfully than the ways in which they would die naturally). And preventing them from existing is even better. So, if spraying crop fields with pesticides prevents lots of insect lives (due to lower insect densities on sprayed crop fields than in wild grasslands or forests), then pesticides could be net beneficial. And in that case, consuming plant food -- far from "denying other beings" -- could be a good thing. This is all speculative, of course, but it's my best guess at the moment.

As I suggest in the end of this piece, I do think that one of the best actions we can take to help wild animals now is not to intervene directly in the wild but, instead, to promote the moral notion that "The pain endured by a fish afflicted with parasites or a rat swallowed alive by a snake is no more tolerable than the 'natural' suffering of humans due to malaria, cancer, or starvation." The goal here is to increase the chance that future human technology is used to reduce wild-animal suffering rather than to vastly expand it.

There are lots of ways to advance the meme that we have a responsibility to prevent the suffering of wild animals: Blogging, having discussions with friends, posting on forums, writing articles, creating videos, and so on. Beyond that, I donate to Vegan Outreach because I think this is an efficient way to convert money into increased concern for animal suffering in general (if not yet for wild animals specifically). Finally, if you did go into politics, you might consider trying to increase funding for animal-welfare research (a good portion of which is funded by government agencies, including the studies on invertebrate welfare, I think).

Good luck with these decisions, and don't hesitate to keep asking questions on this forum.

[LadyMorgana]

Excellent comments from Ryan and Alan about not rushing, working hard and the freedom that the 'get rich and give' path gives you.

Did you watch the youtube videos that utilitymonster linked you to r.e. Giving What We Can on High-Impact Careers? The speakers in that talk are planning to develop a "High Impact Careers" organisation out of it, probably starting in October, in Oxford, then hopefully spreading. The aim would be to not only spread these rather atypical ideas about ethical careers, but to support and advise people who want to pursue a high-impact career, be that professional donorship, politics, research etc. So watch this space!

[Ruairi]

thanks guys so much!:D!

yup ive watched those videos thanks

very good points about freedom and stuff but apart from school i do a lot of other stuff with my time, 5 hours of first aid and rescue training every week and loads more if we're doing first aid cover for a sporting event or something on the weekend, also when i turn 18 ill hopefully be joining my local cliff rescue team which will be another 2 hours a week probably, also i train physically almost every day which probably takes an average of 45 minutes to an hour and a half and then i love going out my friends so i was trying to work this stuff out while im out of school for the summer because i dont wanna work harder than i have to because if i do other areas of my life will suffer for it :/ also i dont like school or studying for school.

ok so what are your thoughts on this \/\/\/\/\/\/\/

1. all animals can suffer + animal lives in nature have net positive utility

2. all animals can suffer + animal lives in nature have net negative utility

3. some animals (insects, etc) cant suffer + anmal lives in nature have net positive utility

4. some animals (insects, etc) cant suffer + animal lives in nature have net negative utility

but if their lives had net negative utility wouldn't there be loads of animal suicide?

if 3 is true then i think we should not eat animals and just eat plants because were not causing suffering that way

if 1 is true then i think we should try to leave animals alone as much as we can but thats completely impossible because we can either eat animals or plants that the pesticides used to grow will kill animals and the plants will then not be available for other animals to eat. if 1 is true whatever actions i take seem completely irrelevant and pointless (from a utilitarian point of view) , i could try to alleviate poverty but that will ultimately lead to more animal suffering. and i see it as being pretty much the same with whatever i would do. the only really utilitarian path i see is donating to somewhere doing research into future possibilities of dramatically changing nature so there isn't as much suffering, but to be honest id say thats a long way away and also given humanities track record with intervening in nature we better be VERY VERY CAREFUL

ive missed loadsa your questions ill try answer them now thank you very very much again!:D!

[LadyMorgana]

I'm inclined to go with 2 but I could very well be wrong.

Animals don't commit suicide because 1) They are evolutionarily programmed not to and (less importantly) 2) The worst pain for a lot of animals is probably while they're dying anyway. Also, do animals really understand the concept of suicide? Can you imagine any of them reasoning that because they're suffering a lot, they should go and jump of a cliff, because this will cause this thing to happen to them that's like sleep but never waking up and thus no more suffering? No, they think, "I've fallen from a height before...and it bloody hurt."

[Ruairi]

so if you're inclined to go with 2 should we kill as many animals as we can until we have found a way to change nature so that the net utility is positive?

i agree that maybe they cant imagine the idea of suicide (although i just did a quick google search and it seems maybe it is possible). but i was thinking would evolution keep their utility above 0 because if it didnt they'd commit suicide and that wouldn't be good for their reproduction but then like you were saying perhaps they're just programmed to not kill themselves regardless of how happy they are

[RyanCarey]

Well this is they key point. Evolution makes non-human animals want to survive. My suspicion is that they have horrible lives, and evolution makes them terrified of death. So I suspect 2. Evolution makes them want to survive despite their shit lives. But it's also plausible that Evolution could make them enjoy their shit lives, so that they wouldn't suicide.

Having said all of that, it seems possible that philosophy will not inform us at all about this question. Instead, perhaps we ought to try living with these non-human animals, studying their behaviour and so on, until we have a scientific understanding of their consciousness.

Also, if you think about the issue more deeply, 2 doesn't necessarily imply that we should kill wild animals. The killing itself will cause suffering. Afterwards, the animals might repopulate to resume suffering. Going out and killing animals could undermine a wider public relations message of animal welfare. And so on...

[LadyMorgana]

Evolution uses a carrot and a stick. If you had little experience of living a life as an evolved being, it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that evolution uses both in equal measure. But, for whatever reason, the threat of pain seems a more powerful motivator than the promise of pleasure (perhaps because we can experience more intense pain than we can pleasure, though it's not clear why this is the case). So evolution uses the stick more.

It probably would be a good idea to shoot wild animals in the head (or, even better, make them unconscious painlessly then kill them), without letting any know you're doing it, if you have nothing better to do. Yes, the food web pretty much balances out eventually anyway but the likelihood is that you've done some good because that animal would have probably otherwise experienced a far more painful death.

[Ruairi]

it seems to me like it is impossible for us to be effective utilitarians until we know which animals can suffer and whether their lives in nature are good or not good. what do you guys think?

how can i help this kind of research take place do you know?

thanks

[LadyMorgana]

I think this is an absolutely vital question for utilitarians.

Science!

[Ruairi]

yea its massive!:D!! is there anywhere they're researching this stuff that i can donate to?:)

[LadyMorgana]

Oh I thought you meant in the long run. Hence, study science. Otherwise, keep your money for yourself to fund yourself one day

[Ruairi]

fund myself as a scientist? sorry im confused :s

[LadyMorgana]

Lol I meant more that, if you don't find a research group/charity/whatever that's doing what you want them to be doing, save your money for now. One day you might need it to fund your own research if you do end up becoming some sort of scientist or fund some other utilitarian project that you're doing. Or you'll at least have a better idea of where's a good place to give it when you're a bit older and have found out more.

[Ruairi]

cool thank you !

[Brian Tomasik]

save your money for now. One day you might need it to fund your own research if you do end up becoming some sort of scientist or fund some other utilitarian project that you're doing.

Yes, exactly.

It's a shame that there isn't an organization with the mission of researching which animals can suffer and whether wild animals have lives worth living. I've considered doing that research myself at some point in the future, once I have enough money to fund myself for a long time. In other words, if you wait 10 years, I might create the type of organization you're looking for.

Another approach is to find professors / graduate students doing research on related topics and encourage them to move in the directions we're interested in. If necessary, offer grants to incentivize the shift of focus. Unfortunately, doing this takes a lot of time, and if you give the money informally, the donations aren't tax-deductible. Ideally, my proposed future organization would fund these grants, so that donors wouldn't need to know the details and could deduct the donations from taxes.

[Brian Tomasik]

I'm inclined to go with 2 but I could very well be wrong.

Animals don't commit suicide because 1) They are evolutionarily programmed not to and (less importantly) 2) The worst pain for a lot of animals is probably while they're dying anyway. Also, do animals really understand the concept of suicide? Can you imagine any of them reasoning that because they're suffering a lot, they should go and jump of a cliff, because this will cause this thing to happen to them that's like sleep but never waking up and thus no more suffering? No, they think, "I've fallen from a height before...and it bloody hurt."

I couldn't have said it better, LadyMorgana. I agree with everything you wrote above!

[Ruairi]

cool thanks guys so do you think it would be best to get rich and fund this research? or i could become a scientist and research it, but not without funding probably... that doesnt seem as effective. but does it seem likely that we'll ever actually be able to alter nature in this kind of way?

[LadyMorgana]

Well, focus on gettin rich. Decide what to do with the money later. The "Get Rich" path to improving the world is wonderfully malleable like that!

I love it when you read a post and agree with everything written. I also love it when someone you look up to reads your post and agrees with everything written