There are two kind of charity evaluator, ones that look at the best way of achieving fundamental goals like: ‘how to make people happier’ and those that look at achieving sub-goals like: ‘how to cure cancer’.
Curing cancer would obviously be a way of making lots of people much happier, but it’s not a ‘good’ in itself, it’s only good because of what it leads to. If there were a form of cancer that didn’t shorten life, and didn’t cause any pain or discomfort or fear, then curing it would be [next to] pointless.
Making someone happier, on the other hand, is never pointless.
View original post 855 more words