And why should I place the ‘good of society’ above my own good and that of my family? This is a very serious question, not a rhetorical one. If my fellow human beings are not created in the image of God, but are merely animals whose inherent value is no different from that of a pig or a cockroach, why should I prioritize their well-being over my own and my family’s when I am in a situation where I can become a billionaire without any legal consequences, and without any spiritual consequences either (since, in that scenario, God does not exist)?
I am well aware that, in this example, I would be acting against the greater good of society—because yes, if everyone behaved this way, there would be utter chaos. As I said, society would collapse into a Hobbesian bellum omnium contra omnes if everyone were to act like that.
But there are two caveats.
First, it is a fact that not everyone would behave this way, so the likelihood of society actually degenerating into a Hobbesian ‘dog-eat-dog’ world would be negligible.
Second, in this hypothetical scenario, I have been lucky: I drew the winning card in the lottery and can become a multibillionaire. I know that doing so would require me to literally step on other people’s well-being in order to increase my own and that of my family—but I would be able to do so without any repercussions whatsoever. I have extremely powerful friends watching my back, and God does not exist, so there would be no higher authority to punish me. So why shouldn’t I? Seriously.
After becoming a billionaire, we would go on to live in the most wondrous places the world has to offer. Why, in that scenario, should I care about the harm I caused in order to reach that goal? I would have harmed only mere biological robots, with no more inherent value than a cockroach. And wouldn’t you step on a cockroach to achieve a goal you consider important?
One possible answer would be that, if I have empathy, I would suffer from knowing the harm I caused. But I could reply that the wealth I have gained for myself and my family—wealth so abundant that it would allow the next ten generations to live in absolute abundance of every earthly good—would be more than enough to justify it, and that any suffering I might experience would be more than outweighed by the benefits secured for my loved ones.
And if you were to say that no, such an act would not be justified regardless, why would you say so? On what basis?