Letter: A philosopher’s choice and the case for intervention

News

“It is not contrary to reason,” wrote David Hume, the 18th century Scottish philosopher, “for me to chuse my total ruin, to prevent the least uneasiness of an Indian or person wholly unknown to me.” The US, the UK, the EU and Nato have all said they will not directly intervene militarily to prevent the “uneasiness” of even some hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians (“Investigators start to gather evidence of possible atrocities against civilians”, Report, April 5).

But is there a threshold number for those suffering horrendous deaths — 5mn, 10mn or 20mn — which, if reached, leads the west to intervene, be it through reason, compassion or perceived self-interest?

And if that happens, what have we to say to those who were allowed to suffer and die before that threshold was reached?

Peter Cave
London W1, UK

Articles You May Like

Ethereum Forecast: Lack Of Conviction Keeps ETH Trapped Below $4K
Ethereum Moves Higher Buyers Strengthen Grip Amid Renewed Market Optimism
Dogecoin (DOGE) Cools Off Buyers Struggle To Sustain Recovery Above Key Levels
Bitcoin Cost Basis Map Reveals Key War Zone Between Bulls & Bears
XRP Mirrors 2017 Bull Cycle, Analysts Eye $20 as Institutional Inflows Grow