Consider you had the option to travel back in time to an alternate universe identical to our own and had the ability to stop the holocaust. Through any means of your choice, whether it be something as dark as killing baby Hitler or forging some docs to get him into art school. Let’s assume this costs you nothing except time and it does not affect your home universe in any way. Let’s also assume that whatever you do will end up successful without any negative unforeseen consequences. For all intents and purposes, you prevent a tragedy and save millions of people. You can pop on over, do your thing, and go back home, free of consequence. Most reasonable people would probably take up the chance to do this. After all, it costs you nothing and you are saving the lives of millions of people. Your life back home is unaffected.

But now consider that you find out that there are an infinite number of universes. And you still have your powers. What do you do? Do you just save the one you already did and call it a day? Do you keep on saving more universes? When do you stop? Do you ever stop? Do you now dedicate your entire life to ridding the multiverse of Hitler in every reality? You are still a mortal after all, with limited time to live and enjoy life. You see, this question eventually boils down to: Given the opportunity to do infinite good at your own inconvenience, how far are you willing to go? Consider for a moment: Dunbar’s number. The exact value of Dunbar’s number isn’t important, as it has been hotly debated in the field of anthropology. However the concept is consistent. It’s the idea that humans can only comprehend social relationships up to a certain amount. This number is usually used to describe how many close friends or meaningful acquaintances one individual can have. Because we can only focus on a finite number of people. The more people we have to try and keep track of, the harder it becomes to see them as individuals. For example in the United States, school shootings happen so often that people are almost desensitized to it. Which is horrifying. One thing I’ve noticed is that shootings with less victims almost seem to incite a bigger emotional response. Since the focus is on select individuals. The more victims there are, the more spread out our attention is. 20 people dying doesn’t make you 10 times as sad as 2 people dying.

The infinite good vs self convenience problem exists on an everyday scale. Evil only truly exists if you are aware of it. Accidentally stepping on an ant is not evil. If you were ignorant to the ant’s existence, you cannot attribute that act to malice. However, where do you draw the line? Because it’s still commonly accepted that intentional ignorance can still be seen as evil. If you are aware of the concept of ants, and the idea that they are delicate and can exist anywhere, would you not have the obligation to take every step with care? You had the potential to avoid stepping on the ant but it is an inconvenience to keep that on your mind all day so you don’t bother. Does that make the act inherently evil? This is the logic behind the phrase “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism” where the very act of participating in capitalism is unethical therefore the maximum good you can do is to forsake it all. You’re probably starting to realize how ridiculous this sounds. Because it’s kind of the exact same scenario as the infinite Hitler scenario. You might say “but Alex, the worth of infinite human lives is worth way more than one ant”. To which I say, yes duh, but that’s not the point is it? Can we perceive the difference between preventing 1 million holocausts and a billion holocausts? How can you even justify not preventing a single holocaust?

So that really is the conundrum isn’t it? What does it mean to truly do good? If you try and think too hard about it, you start to lose your mind. It’s frustrating to think about because there isn’t a satisfying answer. We’re kinda arriving at the idea that it is impossible to do “maximum good” as there is always more good to be done. This becomes overwhelming and leads to nihilism and apathy. A kind of “nothing matters” approach. But I think it’s possible to save yourself from that kind of viewpoint. Consider the movie Everything Everywhere All at Once. The main protagonists begins to embrace the main villain’s sense of nihilism halfway through the movie, since there are infinite things happening at all times, nothing actually matters. But at the end of the movie, she realizes the opposite is actually true. Everything matters, it’s about your attitude. It’s about what you’re willing to focus on.