ChatGPT on Negative Utilitarian Terminology

Responses by ChatGPT-4 October 2023.

Create a glossary of negative utilitarianism (regenerated)

1. Negative Utilitarianism (NU): An ethical theory that prioritizes the reduction of suffering over the maximization of pleasure. It posits that the primary moral goal should be to minimize negative experiences.

2. Suffering: Unpleasant mental or physical sensations, distress, or harm. In the context of NU, it's the primary negative value to be minimized.

3. Pleasure: Positive mental or physical sensations. While traditional utilitarians seek to maximize pleasure, negative utilitarians focus less on this and more on reducing suffering.

4. Utility: A measure of the overall well-being or welfare of individuals. In traditional utilitarianism, utility is increased by pleasure and decreased by suffering. In NU, the focus is solely on decreasing the negative utility caused by suffering.

5. Maximizing vs. Minimizing: Traditional utilitarians aim to maximize overall utility (pleasure minus suffering), while negative utilitarians aim to minimize suffering, even if that doesn't result in the maximum overall utility.

6. Existential Risk Argument: An argument within NU that holds that if suffering is bad, then one might be morally obligated to prevent future generations from coming into existence to avoid potential suffering.

7. Obligation to Assist: The idea that individuals have a moral duty to assist others in reducing their suffering, especially when the cost to oneself is minimal.

8. Asymmetry Argument: The idea that the presence of suffering is bad, but the absence of pleasure (in cases where a being does not exist) is not necessarily bad. This argument is sometimes used to support antinatalist positions within NU.

9. Antinatalism: A philosophical stance that assigns a negative value to birth, often based on the idea that bringing someone into existence exposes them to suffering. Some negative utilitarians adopt antinatalist views due to the asymmetry argument.

10. Effective Altruism: A movement that seeks to use evidence and reason to determine the most effective ways to improve the world. While not exclusive to negative utilitarianism, many within the movement prioritize interventions that reduce suffering.

11. Population Ethics: The branch of ethics that deals with the moral implications of creating new beings. NU has implications in this domain, especially when considering the potential suffering of future generations.

12. Hedonistic vs. Preference-Based Utilitarianism: While hedonistic utilitarianism focuses on pleasure and pain as the only intrinsic values, preference-based utilitarianism values the satisfaction of preferences. NU can be framed in terms of either, but it's often associated with hedonistic views.

13. Instrumental vs. Intrinsic Value: In the context of NU, suffering is seen as having intrinsic negative value (bad in and of itself), while other factors might have instrumental value (valuable for the sake of something else).

14. Threshold Negative Utilitarianism: A variant of NU that suggests there's a threshold of suffering above which the focus shifts from solely minimizing suffering to traditional utility maximization. It tries to address some criticisms of NU by allowing for the pursuit of pleasure after a certain point of suffering reduction.

15. Existential Suffering: Refers to suffering rooted in existential concerns, like the search for meaning or the inevitability of death. This type of suffering is of particular interest to some negative utilitarians who believe existential anguish can be profound.

16. Suffering-focused Ethics: An umbrella term that encompasses ethical views that give primary importance to the reduction of suffering, including but not limited to negative utilitarianism.

17. Moral Asymmetries: Refers to the idea that there might be a moral difference in the weight assigned to pleasure and suffering. Negative utilitarians often argue that suffering has greater moral significance than an equivalent amount of pleasure.

18. Longtermism: The view that the long-term future is of utmost importance. In the context of NU, this might involve considerations about the potential for vast amounts of suffering in the future and how to mitigate it.

19. S-risks: Refers to risks that might bring about vast amounts of suffering without a corresponding increase in well-being. These are of particular concern to some negative utilitarians who prioritize reducing the chance of such scenarios.

20. Suffering Substrate: The idea that suffering might not be limited to humans or animals but could also be experienced by other conscious entities, such as future artificial intelligences. NU would dictate that suffering, regardless of the substrate, should be minimized.

21. Compromise Principles: Strategies or principles aimed at reconciling NU with other ethical views. For example, a compromise might involve prioritizing suffering reduction up to a point and then focusing on traditional utility maximization.

22. Negative Rights vs. Positive Rights: Negative rights are rights to non-interference (e.g., right to life), while positive rights are rights to be provided with certain goods or services (e.g., right to education). NU can influence interpretations of these rights, especially when considering obligations to reduce suffering.

23. Moral Realism vs. Anti-realism: While not exclusive to NU, this debate concerns whether moral claims are objectively true or false. The foundation of NU, like other ethical theories, can be influenced by one's stance on this issue.

24. Moral Uncertainty: The idea that we might not be sure about the correct moral theory. Even if one leans towards NU, they might assign some probability to other ethical theories being correct and thus diversify their moral actions accordingly.

25. Moral Weight: The consideration of how much moral value or consideration is given to different entities. In the context of NU, discussions might revolve around the relative moral weight of reducing extreme suffering for a few versus mild suffering for many.

26. Pain-Pleasure Asymmetry: The philosophical idea that pain and suffering can be more morally significant or intense than pleasure or happiness. This concept underpins many arguments in favor of negative utilitarianism.

27. Moral Patienthood: Refers to entities that deserve moral consideration. In the context of NU, it's crucial to determine which beings can experience suffering and therefore warrant consideration in moral decision-making.

28. Supererogatory Acts: Actions that are morally commendable but not obligatory. In the realm of NU, this might pertain to acts that go beyond the call of duty in minimizing suffering.

29. Value Pluralism: The idea that there are multiple sources of moral value. While NU focuses primarily on the reduction of suffering, a value pluralist might recognize other moral goods beyond just pleasure and pain.

30. Replaceability Argument: In discussions about animal ethics, this argument suggests that it might be morally acceptable to kill animals in certain contexts if they are replaced by other animals with similarly good lives. This argument can be controversial within NU circles, especially if the focus is on minimizing suffering.

31. Scope Neglect: A cognitive bias where individuals often react similarly to both small and large quantities of suffering. NU emphasizes the importance of not neglecting the scope of suffering when making moral decisions.

32. Normative Uncertainty: The state of being unsure about what the "right" action is due to uncertainty about the correct moral theory. For proponents of NU, this can mean balancing the tenets of NU against other moral theories they believe might also be correct.

33. Pareto Improvement: A situation where at least one individual's circumstances are improved without worsening the circumstances of any other individual. In NU, this would involve reducing someone's suffering without increasing anyone else's.

34. Sentience: The capacity to have subjective experiences, typically seen as a prerequisite for the capacity to suffer. NU assigns moral value based on the ability to experience suffering, making sentience a crucial concept.

35. Moral Offset: The idea that one can "offset" a morally wrong action by performing another action that has a positive moral value. Within NU, this might involve compensating for causing suffering in one area by significantly reducing suffering elsewhere.

36. Disvalue: The negative value associated with experiences or states of affairs. For negative utilitarians, suffering is the primary source of disvalue.

37. Moral Intuitionism: The belief that our moral judgments are often based on immediate, intuitive feelings rather than explicit reasoning. NU arguments often appeal to intuitions about the primacy of suffering.

38. Moral Calculus: The act of quantifying and comparing moral values to determine the right course of action. Given NU's focus on minimizing suffering, this often involves estimating and comparing amounts of suffering in different scenarios.

39. Tranquilism: The view that the absence of suffering and the presence of a neutral or tranquil state is of primary moral importance. It's related to but distinct from NU, which focuses solely on the minimization of suffering.

40. Reductive vs. Non-reductive Views of Suffering: A debate within philosophy of mind about whether suffering can be fully explained by physical processes or if there's some non-physical component. This has implications for how we might approach the reduction of suffering in various entities.

41. Differential Ethics: The idea that different ethical standards might apply in different situations or to different entities. Within NU, this might involve differing approaches to reducing suffering based on specific contexts.

42. Existential Value: Concerns the value derived from existence itself, separate from pleasure or suffering. NU debates might engage with whether mere existence, devoid of suffering, has intrinsic value.

43. Rights-Based vs. Consequence-Based Ethics: While NU is fundamentally consequentialist (focused on outcomes), it can intersect with rights-based discussions, especially when considering rights that protect from suffering.

44. Temporal Bias: The tendency to give more weight to immediate consequences over future ones. NU requires careful consideration of future suffering and challenges temporal biases.

45. Moral Bootstrapping: The idea that we can create moral value or disvalue through our decisions. Within NU, this might involve discussions on how our actions today shape future capacities for suffering.

46. Negative Preference Utilitarianism: A variant of NU that focuses on preventing the thwarting of preferences, rather than suffering in a hedonistic sense.

47. Interpersonal Aggregation: The challenge of summing up or comparing suffering across different individuals. NU debates often revolve around how to aggregate suffering to make moral decisions.

48. Epicurean Argument: The argument that non-existence does not constitute a harm, as there's no subject to experience this harm. This can be discussed within NU, especially in relation to antinatalism.

49. Meta-Ethical Relativism: The view that moral truths are relative and vary between individuals or cultures. NU proponents might grapple with whether the imperative to reduce suffering is universal or relative.

50. Suffering Dominance: The idea that in situations with extreme suffering, this suffering "dominates" or outweighs other moral considerations. It's a principle that some negative utilitarians might adopt.

51. Negative Hedonic Tilt: The belief that suffering, especially extreme suffering, has a greater moral urgency than promoting equivalent amounts of pleasure.

52. Moral Hedging: In the face of moral uncertainty, the strategy of diversifying one's actions to account for the possibility of multiple moral theories being correct. This might involve a negative utilitarian taking actions that align with other ethical views as a form of "hedging."

53. Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Suffering: Differentiating between suffering that's inherent to a situation and suffering that's externally imposed. This distinction can be important in NU discussions about the sources and solutions to suffering.

54. Moral Prioritization: The act of deciding which moral issues to address first. For negative utilitarians, this often involves determining where efforts to reduce suffering will be most effective.

55. Negative Projectivism: A meta-ethical view where negative moral values, like suffering, are projected onto the world based on our emotional responses, rather than being inherent properties of the world.

56. Moral Realignment: The act of adjusting one's moral views based on reflection, evidence, or arguments. Proponents of NU might advocate for a moral realignment towards prioritizing the reduction of suffering.

57. Moral Residue: The lingering feelings of guilt or unease when one believes they haven't fully lived up to their moral obligations. In the context of NU, this might relate to feelings about not doing enough to mitigate suffering.

58. Suffering Gradient: A conceptual tool used to measure and compare different intensities and types of suffering, aiding in moral decision-making within NU.

59. Ethical Holism: The idea that ethical systems should be evaluated as wholes, rather than piecemeal. This can be a defense against critiques of specific aspects of NU.

60. Diminishing Marginal Utility of Pleasure: The concept that as one experiences more pleasure, each additional unit of pleasure has less value. This can bolster arguments for focusing on suffering reduction over pleasure maximization.

61. Opportunity Costs in Ethics: The idea that choosing one moral action can prevent the opportunity to pursue another potentially more valuable action. For NU, this might involve weighing where efforts to alleviate suffering are most impactful.

62. Moral Paralysis: A state where an individual is so overwhelmed by the vastness of suffering that they become inactive or indecisive. Negative utilitarians might be particularly susceptible given the emphasis on the enormity of suffering.

63. Moral Elevation: The emotional state experienced when witnessing virtuous acts that inspires one to do good. For negative utilitarians, such acts might be those that significantly reduce suffering.

64. Ethical Particularism: The belief that the moral status of an action depends on the context. This can intersect with NU when determining the best action to reduce suffering in specific situations.

65. Negative Consequentialism: A broader category of which negative utilitarianism is a subset. It refers to any ethical theory that prioritizes the minimization of negative outcomes, not just suffering.

66. Overdemandingness Objection: A criticism often leveled at utilitarian theories, claiming that they demand too much of individuals. NU proponents might face this objection given the immense challenge of reducing global suffering.

67. Moral Nihilism: The belief that no action is inherently moral or immoral. NU debates might engage with nihilism when discussing the intrinsic value of reducing suffering.

68. Moral Distance: The idea that our moral obligations might decrease with physical or emotional distance. Within NU, discussions might revolve around obligations to alleviate distant vs. immediate suffering.

69. Negative Total Utilitarianism: A variant of NU that focuses on minimizing the total amount of suffering across all beings, rather than average suffering.

70. Moral Expansiveness: The willingness to extend moral consideration to a wider range of entities. Given NU's focus on all suffering entities, it often promotes a more expansive moral circle.

71. Ethical Extensionism: The idea of extending ethical considerations to new entities or groups. In the context of NU, this might involve recognizing the capacity for suffering in overlooked or marginalized beings.

72. Pathocentric Ethics: Ethical theories centered on feelings, especially suffering. NU is a primary example of a pathocentric ethical stance.

73. Moral Trade-offs: Situations where one moral value must be sacrificed to uphold another. NU debates often involve trade-offs between minimizing suffering and other moral or practical considerations.

74. Value Lock-in: A situation where early decisions determine the values that will dominate in the long term. This is especially relevant for NU when considering long-term futures and the potential for vast amounts of suffering.

75. Moral Cascading: The ripple effect where one moral action leads to further moral consequences. For negative utilitarians, an action that reduces suffering might inspire further actions in the same direction.

76. Ethical Emergentism: The idea that complex ethical truths can emerge from simpler moral principles. NU might be seen as a foundational principle from which more complex moral guidelines emerge.

77. Moral Atomism: The belief that individual moral actions can be evaluated in isolation. This can contrast with NU's holistic approach to evaluating suffering.

78. Suffering Solipsism: The idea that one can only be sure of their own suffering. While this philosophical stance is not widely held, it has implications for NU's emphasis on external suffering.

79. Utilitarian Equivalence: The idea that different types of positive or negative utilities can be converted into a common measure. For NU, this would involve quantifying various forms of suffering.

80. Moral Phenomenology: The study of the experiential aspect of moral judgments and attitudes. Given NU's focus on the subjective experience of suffering, it intersects significantly with moral phenomenology.

81. Moral Plasticity: The ability of individuals or societies to adapt and change their moral views over time. For NU, this might involve societal shifts towards prioritizing the reduction of suffering.

82. Ethical Absolutism vs. Relativism: While absolutism claims there are objective moral truths, relativism posits that morality is culturally or individually determined. NU's universal emphasis on reducing suffering leans towards absolutism.

83. Moral Overhead: The resources or efforts spent on determining the right course of action. Given NU's focus on effective suffering reduction, minimizing moral overhead can be important.

84. Suffering Altruism: The principle of prioritizing altruistic actions that specifically target and reduce suffering.

85. Dysteleological Suffering: Suffering that lacks a purpose or meaningful end. NU might engage with this concept when discussing seemingly unnecessary or excessive suffering.

86. Moral Myopia: Short-sightedness in moral decision-making. NU encourages a broader view, considering distant and future suffering.

87. Ethical Incrementalism: The belief that moral progress is best achieved through gradual, incremental changes. This approach can be applied within NU to gradually reduce global suffering.

88. Axiological Symmetry: The position that pleasure and suffering are symmetric in moral value. This contrasts with many NU positions that see an asymmetry, valuing suffering reduction over pleasure promotion.

89. Moral Amplification: The idea that certain actions or principles, when propagated, can have magnified moral outcomes. NU actions, like promoting welfare policies, might have amplified effects on suffering reduction.

90. Ethical Inertia: Resistance to change in established moral beliefs or practices. NU proponents might encounter such inertia when advocating for radical changes to reduce suffering.

91. Suffering Capital: Analogous to social or cultural capital, it refers to the accumulated recognition and prioritization of suffering in a society, leading to more resources and efforts directed at its alleviation.

92. Moral Divergence: Situations where two ethical systems or beliefs lead to different moral conclusions. NU might diverge from other ethical systems in scenarios involving trade-offs between pleasure and suffering.

93. Ethical Monism vs. Pluralism: Monism posits a single fundamental moral principle, while pluralism accepts multiple. While NU can be viewed as monistic (reduce suffering), it can coexist in a pluralistic framework with other principles.

94. Intertemporal Ethics: The study of how to weigh and act upon moral considerations spanning different time periods. For NU, this involves considering both present and future suffering.

95. Negative Rights vs. Positive Duties: While negative rights involve non-interference (e.g., not causing suffering), positive duties involve actions to promote welfare. NU can encompass both, emphasizing the duty to alleviate suffering.

96. Ethical Thresholds: Points beyond which an action or situation becomes ethically unacceptable. In NU, such thresholds might pertain to levels of permissible suffering.

97. Moral Contingency: The idea that moral truths or actions are contingent upon certain conditions. NU actions might be contingent on the presence or risk of significant suffering.

98. Utilitarian Equilibrium: A state where the maximum utility has been achieved. For NU, this would involve a state with minimized or nonexistent suffering.

99. Suffering Saturation: A hypothetical state where further additions to suffering do not alter the moral calculus due to overwhelming existing suffering.

100. Ethical Extrapolation: Projecting ethical principles or outcomes into novel or hypothetical scenarios. NU extrapolations might involve speculating on the future landscapes of suffering and interventions.

101. Moral Feedback Loops: Situations where a moral action influences the context, which in turn affects future moral decisions. For NU, interventions to reduce suffering might change societal attitudes, leading to further support for such interventions.

102. Ethical Convergence: The idea that disparate moral systems might, over time, converge towards similar principles or outcomes. NU might be seen as a convergence point for various ethical systems that recognize the primacy of suffering.

103. Moral Heuristics: Simplified rules or shortcuts used in moral decision-making. Within NU, a heuristic might be to always prioritize actions that have a clear path to suffering reduction.

104. Moral Elasticity: The degree to which moral principles can be stretched or adapted to fit various situations. NU's core principle is relatively inelastic, focusing on the reduction of suffering, but its application can vary.

105. Suffering Neutrality: The stance of neither causing nor alleviating suffering. While NU advocates for active suffering reduction, neutrality can be a debated middle ground.

106. Ethical Oscillation: The phenomenon where societies or individuals swing between different moral stances over time. NU might be more prominent during times of heightened awareness of suffering.

107. Moral Resilience: The capacity to maintain or return to one's ethical beliefs and practices after challenges or setbacks. NU proponents might need resilience when faced with overwhelming global suffering.

108. Ethical Echo Chambers: Environments where individuals are only exposed to similar moral beliefs, reinforcing their existing views. NU discussions can benefit from diverse perspectives to avoid such chambers.

109. Suffering Gradient Ethics: Ethical systems that don't solely prioritize the minimization of suffering but weigh it more heavily the more intense it becomes.

110. Moral Proximity: The idea that our moral obligations might be stronger to those closer to us, whether emotionally, physically, or culturally. NU challenges this by emphasizing the equal moral weight of all suffering.

111. Negative Virtue Ethics: A perspective that focuses on cultivating virtues that specifically aim to reduce or prevent suffering in oneself and others.

112. Ethical Fragility: Situations where small changes in conditions can lead to large changes in moral outcomes. In the context of NU, minor shifts in policy or awareness could lead to significant reductions in suffering.

113. Moral Forecasting: The act of predicting the future moral implications of current actions. Given NU's emphasis on long-term suffering reduction, forecasting is crucial.

114. Ethical Saturation Points: Thresholds beyond which additional moral efforts yield diminishing returns. For NU, this might involve determining when efforts to reduce suffering are better redirected elsewhere.

115. Suffering Equity: The principle that efforts to reduce suffering should be distributed equitably, ensuring that no group disproportionately bears the brunt of suffering.

116. Moral Leverage: Situations where a small moral effort or intervention can lead to disproportionately large positive outcomes. NU seeks points of leverage to efficiently reduce suffering.

117. Ethical Compatibilism: The belief that two seemingly opposing ethical systems can be reconciled. Discussions might revolve around harmonizing NU with other ethical beliefs.

118. Moral Vectoring: Analyzing not just the magnitude but also the direction of moral efforts. In the context of NU, it's not just about how much suffering is reduced, but where and how it's being addressed.

119. Negative Deontological Ethics: Ethical systems that prioritize duty-based rules specifically designed to prevent harm or suffering.

120. Moral Equilibrium: A state where moral actions and their consequences balance out. For NU, it might be a hypothetical state where efforts to reduce suffering and the emergence of new suffering are in balance.

121. Ethical Invariance: The idea that moral principles should remain consistent across different contexts or scenarios. NU's focus on suffering provides a consistent metric, though its application can vary.

122. Moral Multiplicity: Holding multiple moral views or principles simultaneously and applying them based on context. While NU has a singular focus on reducing suffering, its adherents might also consider other ethical principles in specific situations.

123. Suffering Arbitrage: Borrowed from economic terminology, it refers to capitalizing on discrepancies in the recognition or alleviation of suffering across different areas or contexts to achieve maximum moral impact.

124. Ethical Immunization: Developing resistance to moral persuasion or change due to repeated exposure to opposing views. NU proponents might experience this when frequently confronted with counterarguments.

125. Moral Phase Transitions: Situations where small changes in moral beliefs or conditions lead to a sudden shift in ethical behavior. NU awareness campaigns might aim for such transitions in societal attitudes toward suffering.

126. Ethical Differentials: The differences in moral outcomes resulting from slightly varied actions or beliefs. In the context of NU, it might involve comparing the outcomes of different strategies to alleviate suffering.

127. Moral Velocity: The rate at which moral change occurs in an individual or society. NU movements might aim to increase this velocity to rapidly reduce global suffering.

128. Negative Teleological Ethics: Ethical systems that focus on end goals or purposes specifically aimed at preventing or reducing harm and suffering.

129. Moral Calibration: Adjusting one's moral compass or actions based on feedback or new information. For NU, this could involve refining strategies for suffering reduction based on their effectiveness.

130. Ethical Non-monotonicity: The idea that moral progression isn't always linear or consistent; there can be setbacks or reversals. NU campaigns might face periods of both progress and regression.

131. Moral Momentum: The tendency for certain moral movements or changes to continue in their direction of progression due to accumulated support and influence. NU efforts can gain such momentum with increasing awareness and advocacy.

132. Suffering Reduction Equivalence: Comparing different types or instances of suffering to determine their moral equivalence. This aids NU in prioritizing interventions.

133. Moral Gradient Descent: Borrowed from optimization terminology, it refers to iteratively refining moral actions to approach the most ethically optimal outcome. In the context of NU, it's about continually improving strategies to minimize suffering.

134. Ethical Oscillators: Factors or influences that cause periodic shifts in moral views or behaviors. NU's prominence might oscillate based on global events that highlight suffering.

135. Moral Inflection Points: Specific moments or events that lead to a significant change in moral trajectory. For NU, such points could be major global events that dramatically increase awareness of suffering.

136. Negative Rights Maximization" Focusing on maximizing rights that prevent harm or suffering, in line with the principles of NU.

137. Ethical Hysteresis: The lag between a change in moral conditions and the resulting change in moral behavior or beliefs. NU campaigns might need to account for such lags when promoting suffering reduction.

138. Moral Amplifiers: Factors that enhance the impact or reach of moral actions or messages. NU proponents might leverage media or influential advocates as amplifiers.

139. Suffering Footprint: Analogous to the "carbon footprint," it refers to the total amount of suffering an entity (individual, organization, nation) directly or indirectly causes or alleviates.

140. Moral Equipoise: A state of balance or equality between opposing moral considerations. Within NU, this could refer to a balance between efforts to reduce suffering and other ethical imperatives.

141. Ethical Counterfactuals: Hypothetical scenarios used to evaluate moral decisions by considering alternative outcomes. NU might employ these to measure the effectiveness of suffering-reducing actions against what might have occurred otherwise.

142. Moral Dissonance: A psychological discomfort arising from holding contradictory moral beliefs or actions. NU adherents might experience this when facing situations where absolute suffering reduction conflicts with other values.

143. Suffering Trajectory: A projected path of suffering over time, used to anticipate and strategize future alleviation efforts.

144. Moral Baselines: Reference points used to evaluate moral progress or regression. For NU, a baseline might be set levels of suffering at a particular time or place, against which future conditions are compared.

145. Ethical Resonance: When a particular moral view or action aligns harmoniously with an individual's or society's broader values, amplifying its impact. NU campaigns might seek such resonance to enhance their efficacy.

146. Moral Refraction: The alteration or distortion of moral views as they pass through different cultural or personal "lenses." NU principles might be interpreted differently across diverse contexts.

147. Negative Capability: Borrowed from literary criticism, it denotes the capacity to accept uncertainty and doubt without any irritable reach for facts or reasons. Within the NU dialogue, it might describe a willingness to engage with the vastness of suffering without demanding immediate solutions.

148. Ethical Superposition: Borrowed from quantum mechanics, it suggests that in complex moral scenarios, an action might exist in multiple ethical states until a decision is made. NU practitioners might use this concept to explore the multifaceted implications of suffering-reduction strategies.

149. Moral Elastic Limit: The point beyond which a moral system or belief is stretched to a degree where it can't return to its original state. NU might face such limits when extreme measures to reduce suffering challenge its foundational principles.

150. Suffering Economies: Systems or frameworks that aim to allocate resources efficiently to reduce the most suffering.

151. Ethical Isomorphism: The idea that different moral structures or beliefs can produce the same ethical outcomes. NU might find parallels with other ethical systems in terms of suffering reduction strategies.

152. Moral Synthesis: The integration of various moral views into a cohesive whole. Within the NU discourse, this might involve reconciling suffering reduction with other ethical priorities.

153. Negative Utopianism: The pursuit of a society or world where suffering is minimized, even if other typically utopian features (like maximum happiness) aren't achieved.

154. Ethical Bifurcation: Points where moral decision-making diverges significantly based on slight changes in conditions or beliefs. NU debates might encounter such bifurcations when discussing thresholds of permissible suffering.

155. Moral Vacuum: Situations where traditional ethical guidelines don't offer clear direction. In such spaces, NU's clear mandate to reduce suffering might provide guidance.

156. Moral Cohesion: The degree to which components of a moral system or community work harmoniously towards shared goals. NU communities might strive for such cohesion to effectively combat global suffering.

157. Ethical Isotropy: The idea that moral obligations or values are uniform in all directions, not favoring any particular group or entity. NU's universal concern for all suffering entities embodies this principle.

158. Moral Inertia: The resistance to change in moral beliefs or behaviors, even when faced with compelling reasons. NU movements might work to overcome societal moral inertia regarding prevalent suffering.

Exploring these further layers of terminology provides a deeper understanding of the multifaceted nature of negative utilitarianism, its challenges, and its intersections with broader ethical and philosophical considerations. Each concept can serve as a starting point for more extensive reflection and discourse."

* * *

Also for the glossary, add some negative utilitarians - or negative utilitarian-related philosophers - with synopses of their work.
"Absolutely. Here are some notable figures related to negative utilitarianism or whose work has been influential in discussions of suffering-focused ethics.

1. R. Ninian Smart (1927–2001)
   Synopsis: A philosopher who introduced the term "negative utilitarianism" in his discussions. While not a proponent of the philosophy, his work provided a foundation for its analysis.

2. Karl Popper (1902–1994)
   Synopsis: Renowned for his contributions to the philosophy of science, Popper touched upon negative utilitarianism in his discussions on ethics. He highlighted the importance of reducing suffering but also recognized potential challenges of a strict NU approach.

3. David Benatar
   Synopsis: A prominent contemporary philosopher known for his defense of antinatalism in his book "Better Never to Have Been." While not strictly a negative utilitarian, his arguments about the asymmetry between pain and pleasure align with NU principles.

4. David Pearce
   Synopsis: A philosopher who advocates for the abolition of suffering using biotechnological means. His work, "The Hedonistic Imperative," outlines a vision for a future where sentient beings won't experience involuntary suffering.

5. Gustav Fechner (1801–1887)
   Synopsis: While not a negative utilitarian, Fechner's work in psychophysics explored the relationship between the intensity of stimuli and perceived sensation, which has implications for understanding suffering and well-being.

6. Herman Tønnessen (1919–2001)
   Synopsis: Tønnessen was a philosopher and animal rights advocate. His work emphasized the moral importance of reducing suffering, particularly in non-human animals, which resonates with NU values.

7. Clark Wolf
   Synopsis: A philosopher who has discussed issues related to population ethics, a field closely linked with negative utilitarianism, especially when considering questions about bringing new lives into existence.

8. Thomas Metzinger
   Synopsis: A philosopher and cognitive scientist known for his work on the nature of consciousness. While not a negative utilitarian, his discussions on the potential suffering of sentient beings in virtual environments have relevance to NU concerns.

9. Julio Cabrera
   Synopsis: A philosopher known for his negative ethics, which argues that human life is structurally negative. His work intersects with negative utilitarian themes, especially in discussions about the ethics of procreation.

10. Axel Barceló
    Synopsis: A philosopher who has written about the asymmetry arguments related to suffering and happiness. His work provides philosophical depth to discussions central to negative utilitarianism.

11. Arthur Schopenhauer (1788–1860)
    Synopsis: A German philosopher who posited that life is fundamentally characterized by suffering. While not a negative utilitarian, his pessimistic views on existence and emphasis on suffering have influenced discussions in suffering-focused ethics.

12. Peter Wessel Zapffe (1899–1990)
    Synopsis: A Norwegian philosopher known for his existentialist and pessimistic views on life, especially his work "The Last Messiah." He argued that humans are over-evolved, leading to an increased awareness of suffering and existential dread.

13. Epicurus (341–270 BCE)
    Synopsis: An ancient Greek philosopher who, although not a negative utilitarian, emphasized the importance of avoiding pain over seeking pleasure. His views on hedonism touch upon themes central to NU.

14. G. E. Moore (1873–1958)
    Synopsis: A philosopher who critiqued classical utilitarianism and introduced the "open question argument." His work on ethics, although not directly advocating for NU, has influenced the broader discussions of utilitarianism.

15. Les U. Knight
    Synopsis: An environmental activist known for promoting the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement (VHEMT), which posits that humans should voluntarily cease reproducing to prevent environmental degradation and suffering.

16. John Leslie (1940–)
    Synopsis: A philosopher who has written on the risks of human extinction and cosmic suffering. His works touch on themes related to the potential vastness of suffering in the universe.

17. Andrea Iacona
    Synopsis: A philosopher who has discussed the asymmetry between pain and pleasure, suggesting that while the presence of pain is bad, the absence of pleasure is not necessarily a bad thing, echoing sentiments in negative utilitarianism.

18. Buddha (c. 563/480 – c. 483/400 BCE)
    Synopsis: Founder of Buddhism, which is centered on the Four Noble Truths that recognize the fundamental nature of suffering in life. Though not a negative utilitarian, Buddhist teachings emphasize the alleviation of suffering.

19. Jim Crawford
    Synopsis: Author of "Confessions of an Antinatalist." While not strictly a negative utilitarian, his antinatalist views converge with NU themes about the ethics of bringing new sentient life into a world filled with suffering."

* * * Add some terms to the negative utilitarian glossary relating to the work on the abolitionist project as conceived by David Pearce
Certainly, David Pearce's "Abolitionist Project" is a central piece of work in the realm of negative utilitarianism and suffering reduction. Here are some terms and concepts related to his work and ideas:

1. The Abolitionist Project
   Synopsis: Pearce's proposal to use biotechnology to abolish suffering in all sentient life. It advocates for the genetic reengineering of ecosystems to prevent cruelty and suffering in the wild.

2. The Hedonistic Imperative
   Synopsis: A manifesto by Pearce which argues that it's not only possible but also morally obligatory to eradicate suffering through genetic engineering and other technological means.

3. Gradients of Bliss
   Synopsis: Pearce's vision of a future where suffering has been replaced by gradients of well-being, ensuring that even the worst possible experiences are still overall positive.

4. Post-Darwinian Life
   Synopsis: A term used by Pearce to describe a future phase of evolution where sentient beings no longer experience involuntary suffering, achieved through the guided use of biotechnology.

5. Mood Enrichment
   Synopsis: The use of biotechnological tools to elevate the default mood levels of sentient beings, ensuring a higher baseline of well-being.

6. Invincible Well-being
   Synopsis: A state where sentient beings are free from involuntary suffering and are capable of experiencing only positive emotions and moods.

7. Ethical Bioengineering
   Synopsis: The use of biotechnological interventions with the primary goal of ethical enhancement, such as reducing suffering and increasing well-being.

8. Phasing Out Predation
   Synopsis: One of the radical ideas proposed by Pearce, suggesting the genetic reengineering of natural ecosystems to eliminate carnivorous behavior and replace it with more humane nutritional sources.

9. Neurochemical Blueprint
   Synopsis: Refers to the idea that our emotional and subjective experiences are largely determined by the neurochemical makeup of our brains, which can be modified to enhance well-being.

10. Ecosystem Reformation
    Synopsis: A comprehensive restructuring of natural ecosystems to prioritize the well-being of all sentient creatures, minimizing harm and competition.

11. Paradise Engineering
    Synopsis: The deliberate design and creation of environments and biological systems that optimize well-being and minimize suffering.

12. Suffering-Focused Ethics
    Synopsis: An ethical framework that Pearce aligns with, prioritizing the reduction and elimination of suffering as the primary moral imperative.

13. Superhappiness
    Synopsis: A state of elevated well-being and joy that goes beyond traditional human experiences of happiness, achievable through advanced biotechnological interventions.

14. Biological Calvinism
    Synopsis: Pearce's critique of the idea that suffering serves a greater purpose or is divinely ordained. He argues against justifying suffering on these grounds and advocates for its abolition.

15. Utilitronium
    Synopsis: A hypothetical substance or state of matter that maximizes utility or pleasure. Pearce has discussed the possibility of converting matter into utilitronium to maximize positive value in the universe.

16. Compasionate Biology
    Synopsis: The idea of reengineering the biological world in a way that minimizes suffering and is rooted in compassion for all sentient beings.

17. CRISPR Ethics
    Synopsis: The ethical considerations surrounding the use of CRISPR and other gene-editing tools to modify organisms in the pursuit of suffering reduction and well-being enhancement.

18. Neuroarchitecture
    Synopsis: The design and structure of neural systems that determine subjective experiences. Pearce's work emphasizes the potential for modifying our neuroarchitecture to elevate well-being.

19. Default Happiness
    Synopsis: Pearce's vision of a future where the baseline emotional state for sentient beings is one of happiness or well-being, achieved through genetic and neurochemical modifications.

20. Ethical Transhumanism
    Synopsis: A movement that combines the goals of transhumanism (enhancing human capacities) with an ethical framework prioritizing the reduction of suffering.

21. Nootropic Ethics
    Synopsis: The ethical considerations of using cognitive enhancers (nootropics) not just for cognitive enhancement, but for mood elevation and suffering reduction.

22. Postgenomic Ethics
    Synopsis: Ethical considerations in the post-genomic era, where genome sequencing and modification become commonplace. This includes discussions on the moral imperatives of using this technology to reduce suffering.

23. Qualia Engineering
    Synopsis: The deliberate modification of the quality of conscious experiences. Pearce's work emphasizes the potential to engineer our qualia to favor positive experiences over negative ones.

24. Benevolent Nature 2.0
    Synopsis: Pearce's vision of a reengineered natural world where the well-being of all sentient creatures is optimized, and ecosystems function without the inherent cruelties of Darwinian life.

25. Pleasure Principle Reimagined
    Synopsis: A reevaluation of Freud's pleasure principle, with the idea that advanced technology can allow sentient beings to exist in states of perpetual pleasure without the traditional drawbacks.

26. Wireheading
    Synopsis: Direct stimulation of the brain to produce pleasurable experiences. While Pearce discusses the potential of such technology, he also emphasizes the ethical complexities and potential pitfalls.

27. Pan-Species Welfare State
    Synopsis: An extension of the welfare state concept to all sentient beings, ensuring that every creature, regardless of species, has its well-being and freedom from suffering safeguarded.

* * * see too
ChatGPT Utilitarian Glossary
ChatGPT on Negative Utilitarianism
ChatGPT on Negative Utilitarianism
ChatGPT on Philosophical Hedonism
ChatGPT on Utilitarianism and Effective Altruism

Home
ChatGPT Utility
ChatGPT Overview
Utilitarian Hotlinks
ChatGPT on Eugenics
ChatGPT on Abolitionism
ChatGPT on Biohappiness
ChatGPT on Transhumanism
ChatGPT on Superhappiness
ChatGPT on Antidepressants
ChatGPT on Utopian Surgery
ChatGPT on Brave New World
The Wit and Wisdom of ChatGPT
Utilitarian Memes for Utopian Teens
ChatGPT on The Hedonistic Imperative
ChatGPT on The Reproductive Revolution