News

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

“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

Top Wall Street analysts bet on these stocks to brace for a sharp downturn
PREPA fuel line lenders reach deal giving them priority over bondholders
Skill vs Art in Trading Stocks, Options, or Investing Ep 196
Nobel Prize Laureate Paul Krugman Warns of an Eternal Winter for Blockchain
Munis rally to kick off December