We can't help everyone
In real life, we almost never manage to avoid harming everyone, or to help everyone in need. So someone asks: "If everyone matters equally, how do we choose?"
Equal consideration works with priorities
The principle of equal consideration doesn't forbid choosing. It only forbids choosing by species. There are several fair standards for deciding who to help first.
Some standards for priority
- Severity: the worse someone's situation, the higher their priority. Someone in terrible pain comes before someone who's mildly uncomfortable.
- Numbers: helping more individuals, with the same effort, is usually better than helping fewer.
- Size of the benefit: help that changes someone's life a lot counts more than a small bit of help.
- Chance of success: it's worth considering how likely the help is to work.
When the standards clash
Sometimes the standards point in the same direction. Sometimes they don't. For example: should you help many with a small benefit, or a few with a huge benefit? These decisions are hard, and the author discusses how to weigh them in other volumes.
The main point is: all these standards look at each one's situation, not at species.
In short
- Equal consideration fits with putting some first instead of others.
- Severity, numbers, and size of the benefit are fair standards.
- Species, on its own, isn't a fair standard for priority.