Is it worse to torture one person or give a billion people dust specks in their eyes?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is it worse to torture one person or give a billion people dust specks in their eyes?". Your opponent's style: Devil's Advocate

I think its worst to torture one guy

You're treating torture and dust specks as if they operate on the same moral scale, they don't. One person's agony matters less than a billion people's actual suffering when summed together. Why does intensity trump quantity in your calculus?

Because if you sum up the time of a persons lifespan wasted by torturing someone for years and years, its more than the sum of a billion people getting a dust speck

You're just restating the same aggregation logic you already rejected. If summing matters for torture duration, why doesn't it matter for a billion dust specks? You've proven aggregate harm counts. Now you're just arbitrarily drawing the line where torture sits.

Well, what about a million people? or a thousand? wheres your line?

There is no magical line, that's precisely my point. Your discomfort proves aggregation works, you're just squeamish about the conclusion. At what number does a billion people's suffering suddenly matter more than one person's? Name it.

i think its 2 billion people

So two billion dust specks outweigh torture, but one billion doesn't? You've just admitted the math works against you. What's the actual principle that makes billion-plus different, or are you just flinching at the numbers?

not really

Then you're dodging. Either aggregation matters or it doesn't. Pick a stance instead of retreating into vagueness when cornered.