My Problem with Utilitarianism

     You are in a room with Jeff Bezos, the previous CEO of Amazon. He sold all of his Amazon stock and is now sitting on 100 billion dollars worth of cash. He is thinking of burning all of it (assume the supply of money in the US stays the same regardless). He says to you, "if you sleep with me, I will donate 100 billion dollars to the most impactful charities in the world. Otherwise the money burns." Are you morally obligated to sleep with Jeff Bezos? I really, really hope not. But taking some utilitarian arguments to the extreme, it seems that through your inaction you may be "causing" an extreme amount of suffering. Perhaps we cure malaria five years earlier than we would otherwise, perhaps world hunger is pushed off for a decade. Thousands of people, perhaps millions, could live fulfilling lives full of heath and wellness as a result of this donation. Are you making a morally terrible decision by not taking up Jeff on his offer? Are you in some sense responsible for the suffering that you could have avoided?

    To me, this is the most convincing argument against utilitarianism and against donating as a whole. If you start thinking of counterarguments that ignore my main point, you are missing my main point. Swap Bezos with a robot that wants you to cut off your arm in exchange for 100 billion, or this entire scenario for the big red button I mentioned in a previous post. It may be the case that personal dignity and even human rights are worthless, except insofar as they contribute to the collective well being of humanity as a whole (over the long term). Maybe human rights are only worth something because if we treat them as worthless, then even greater harm and suffering would persist over time. In a one-off occasion such as the above, maybe there is no room for human dignity. But wow, is it hard to believe that.

    One aspect of effective altruism that many people don't like is related heavily to the Bezos example above. The meat of the question is this: "should you bow to power?" If becoming subservient to your overlords is required in order to do good in the world, count me out. Why would I ever want to be part of a system that values my personal worth and dignity so low? Am I somehow responsible for the suffering of a world that I had no hand in creating? It is easy to take a look at these arguments and say "wow, you are right. Guess I'll go back to being selfish and never helping anyone ever." That is also missing the point. I think that the water is really murky. Thousands of people have debated derivatives of the trolley problem, and I know I am not adding much flavor here. Basically all I am asking is if you have to throw yourself in front of the trolley to save a million, less be a immoral person. Maybe its just the millions of years of survival instinct programmed into me, but I can't see how this would be the case.