[Serious] Moral Obligations toward Possible Worlds

[vulcanlogician]

Perhaps an quasi-Epicurean may say "Yes, pleasure is good and suffering is bad. But we prioritize the reduction of pain and suffering. Adding to overall happiness comes second to this." If that was your principle as a utilitarian, would slavery still be permissible?

Yes.  Unequivocally and demonstrably, as some of the very final arguments for slavery were valid utilitarian arguments.  Even if we disagree with the conclusions, we can see that and how they would be true if the contents were true.

I know, I know. I haven't read the essay (by a philosopher who survived the holocaust and labor camps) who (begrudgingly) --because he was a utilitarian-- analysed utilitarianism and found (as you say) "unequivocally" that slavery could-- in some circumstances contribute to maximal goodness. (I totally forget his name.)

All I want to do is investigate and test this position. Perhaps I will return from my investigation concluding the same thing. (shrug) But perhaps not...

It isn't forbidden -by utilitarianism, at all.  We're thinking of some other thing when we imagine as much.  Referring to some other value or value system.

(forbidden was the wrong word)

Some value system that wants to reduce suffering and make people maximally happy. That system. 

I think abolition of slavery fits very well into that system. Of course, my investigation wants to see if it can fit perfectly into it.

I don't think I'm imagining something other than utilitarianism. But maybe I am. I want to argue that maximal happiness simply cannot exist where people are enslaved and controlled by another person. Like I said, I need to do some research (and maybe I'll turn up empty handed) but I want to investigate this. I think it's possible to argue this.

Right or wrong, it's worth the investigation. As they say... a negative result is still a result.