The problem with the article is that they did not make the point you are conveying here.
They say:
1. QF cares only about direct utility
2. $saving a life brings $100,000 of INdirect utility for society and/or the person who's life is saved
3. we (again: who?!) don't care about the direct utility in this case
I have no idea how you can wrap your head around the idea that this is a good representation of any valid critique.
Btw, I think QF is stupid, but that's not the point here.
Comments
The problem with the article is that they did not make the point you are conveying here.
They say: 1. QF cares only about direct utility 2. $saving a life brings $100,000 of INdirect utility for society and/or the person who's life is saved 3. we (again: who?!) don't care about the direct utility in this case
I have no idea how you can wrap your head around the idea that this is a good representation of any valid critique.
Btw, I think QF is stupid, but that's not the point here.