Hume tells us that: 'Tis not contrary to reason to prefer the destruction of the whole world to the scratching of my finger. 'Tis not contrary to reason for me to chuse my total ruin, to prevent the least uneasiness of an Indian or person wholly unknown to me. 'Tis as little contrary to reason to prefer even my own acknowledg'd lesser good to my greater, and to have a more ardent affection for the former than the latter.'
a) Explain Hume's point in this passage in terms of his general picture of practical reasoning.
b) Do you think Kant would agree with what Hume says in the above passage? Why or why not?
c) How might Sidgwick explain the plausibility of at least part, if not all, of Hume's view? In answering, you should draw on his views about Hedonistic Egoism and Utilitarianism.