Abstract

Starting point

▪         Starting point of this research is the emotional shock which is created by extreme cases of suffering. The occupation with the phenomenon of suffering is (in accordance with Nichomachean ethics) not a means to an end, but an end in itself.

▪         An analytical approach to suffering is confronted with unpleasant theses. One of them is that the degree of suffering increases with evolution and seems not to be limited. The degree of happiness increases as well, but suffering cannot be compensated by happiness across individuals.

▪         The lack of attention given to this phenomenon can be explained by the fact, that it is a minority problem. The extreme suffering of a minority, tolerated and suppressed in the name of a higher purpose (whatever that is), reminds of fascism. But the system is more ingenious than that. Turning against life results in an additional kind of suffering, imposed in the name of an additional higher purpose.

What is the rational answer to extreme suffering?

Society

Type of Problem

▪         What is the best worldview to reduce suffering?

▪         What is the best concept of justice to reduce suffering? What priority should be given to the worst cases?

▪         What actions should be taken? How can priorities be derived? How should resources be allocated?

Result

Results have to be considered as theses:

▪         The best worldview to reduce suffering is the one of enlightenment, a commitment to science combined with scepticism.

▪         The best concept of justice to reduce suffering is contractualism, the Kantian tradition in social contract theory. The most important contribution within this tradition is Rawls’ Theory of Justice. Rawls clarified that his theory is about fairness. Justice in a strict sense demands the denial of the world as it is, a position which is taken by negative utilitarianism.

▪         From the negative utilitarian point of view it doesn’t make sense to combine the risk-averse difference principle with a risk-tolerant population ethics. The principle of intergenerational impartiality should be replaced by a risk-averse principle. The price that has to be paid for this change is a conditional hostility of the theory. In an optimistic scenario the theory is life-friendly, otherwise not.

▪         The best concept to derive actions and priorities from above theory is a Socratic discussion followed by a democratic vote. At the present state of knowledge it is impossible to calculate priorities and quantify resource allocation as it is done in the Copenhagen Consensus.

Individual

Type of Problem

What is the best philosophy of life to reduce suffering?

Result

Thesis: The best concept to reduce suffering is a contemporary version of the Hindu aims in life. The Hindu concept implies a middle path between biological needs (Artha and Kama) and ethical ideals. The middle path depends on the individual risk profile and the stage of life. Ethical ideals are the following:

▪         The implementation of the social concepts mentioned above (Dharma)

▪         The acknowledgement of Buddhist scepticism by getting on distance to the material world (Moksha).