Quote:And what's the criteria for necessity?
In order to hear the dog make the noises I like so much, it is necessary for me to skin it.
*shrug* Evil, like good, is positional and temporal. Fallible and imperfect moral agents (in this case, human beings) are unlikely to see all the ramifications of a particular act.
As to your specific objection, I'm unconvinced that any need for personal enjoyment is sufficient to over ride a particularly heinous act. Admittedly, I can not be sure that your pleasure doesn't outweigh the suffering of the dog, but so what? If that were the criteria used, we would never punish rapists, thrill-killers or paedophiles.
That being said, I agree that there is no hard and fast yardstick regarding necessity. There is a thought experiment which addresses this directly:
Alien beings arrive at the Earth and contact you, personally. They are able to convince you that they have a treatment which will end cancer, AIDS, and all birth defects. Clearly, this treatment will drastically reduce suffering among your fellow humans, and will, on balance, make the world a better, happier place. The kicker is that they won't release the details of this treatment until you torture a 5 year old child to death on world-wide television broadcast. What do you do?
My definition above is meant to be a working one, not a metaphysical certitude.
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
