Moral Acts

[robvalue]

Sure, that would be one way. At that point, you could develop a system of objective morality. It's just that the system would be no use to anyone who doesn't agree with it; that is the problem. It's why there is no problem agreeing standard ways of measuring length and so forth, because it's practical to have the same system. To "use your system" would require an authority to enforce it, just like all moral systems. It's not a criticism of your idea, which is actually quite inventive.

And of course, although practical, it's very simplistic and it wouldn't be concerned with how exactly the person ends up in that state. Plugging someone into a "happiness machine" would then be equivalent to, or even better than maintaining a good quality of life for them. This points to the larger problem of how exactly you go about maintaining wellbeing, and not just the wellbeing itself. Morality is fucking complicated.