This is what happens when you give a utilitarian human rights, they abuse the concept and proclaim it refuted by using circumstances that will never occur.
You conveniently do not mention what right is being violated or how that’s occurring. You also assume that rights can be traded off with Utica directly and thus assume the torture v dust specks problem that Rights based views rightly reject.
In a world with immensely happy people that were only happy because they had been forcibly wireheaded, I would consider it to be correct to find that world non-preferable.
This is what happens when you give a utilitarian human rights, they abuse the concept and proclaim it refuted by using circumstances that will never occur.
You conveniently do not mention what right is being violated or how that’s occurring. You also assume that rights can be traded off with Utica directly and thus assume the torture v dust specks problem that Rights based views rightly reject.
In a world with immensely happy people that were only happy because they had been forcibly wireheaded, I would consider it to be correct to find that world non-preferable.