Hacker News Reader

That question is not resolvable in any meaningful way. You can justify anything with a rationalization

Yeah, especially if you mix in long termism :)

I share your vector

However the point/problem is that our position has exactly the same epistemic grounding as to what is “right” as “my philosophy is to Kill all but 10 humans” does.

>> Is my action beneficial to mankind and nature as a whole

You're going to have to make choices between those two.

Mankind has destroyed how many other species now?

So, you'll imminently lead a mob to kill executives of companies that majorly contribute to climate change?

Many people have kept slaves, even beating them to death - and still answered yes to your question. Many criminals in prison will tell you their victim deserved whatever.

I don't know how to define morality, but yours is not helpful.

Everyone that has ever that has done terrible things has likely asked themselves the same question. And that is a problem.

What is beneficial can be debated, as can how to weight the pros and cons of any action. Still, it is a good question to ask!