I tend to retreat to motivation: If there is no reason to kill the butterfly, then killing it doesn't make sense. Hence, I don't.
That is an interesting analysis--I enjoyed reading it. Thanks.
I guess for me it comes down to even if you're not consciously aware in the moment, that the butterfly is valuable--but in what way? (I mean it's easier to quickly "feel" the butterfly is valuable if you are sure about that beforehand, I guess.)
So like ultimately you have to judge the value of the butterfly and its life against whatever motivation you might have for smashing it--is it that it is fun to see bugs smash or maybe it's to scare someone or make someone else sad, or perhaps because you cannot avoid smashing the butterfly safely.
But it all comes down to value and I don't know how value can be assigned by logic--I mean there can be a value by association, but at the very root there must be some kind of value assigned.
Often it seems like in real dilemmas it comes to value of yourself--your survival, your enjoyment etc. vs. value for things that conflict with that (like a butterfly), or just other neutral parties.
And the rest is just figuring out what exact ratio of value to assign.
Perhaps if you feel the butterfly is very valuable--either just inherently as a living thing or because you prefer the butterfly for some reason over other living things, then the reaction is stronger initially--like that you would simply not harm it unless necessary.
But if you are faced with a really serious dilemma like you're driving and you don't want to hit a butterfly but logically you know that if you swerve you could crash the car and your kids are in the car, then being able to think it through logically is going to help more in the moment.
But that still comes down to valuing the kids vs. valuing the butterfly, and perhaps why. Like do you value the kids just for your own selfish reasons--because they will perhaps take care of you when you are older, or do you value them as individuals that for no real benefit to you, you want to see grow and flourish and you would sacrifice a butterfly or even yourself for that.
And the same is for the butterfly (minus it's being pitted against something more valuable to you) and whether you would just value the butterfly on it's own--for being alive. Not necessarily going to do anything to benefit you, but perhaps makes you happy to know you've not caused it harm because you want it to be free or something.
I wonder if it is more of a P thing to sometimes struggle with deciding some ultimate conclusion, but perhaps to be able to try to make those decisions to deal with the moment--like logically realize that you mustn't swerve the car to avoid a butterfly, or else in the moment realize if your kids are gleefully jumping on butterflies without understanding what death means, to stop them and release the butterfly instead because you shouldn't kill something for no reason.
Because I can relate to not necessarily having some end-game plan when I make decisions, and I don't like making decisions that affect others either. Being wrong is usually really painful, when it might not be as painful to be wrong about something that doesn't affect another person or thing that we care about.
I can't relate to feeling blind--just listening to my emotions most of the time and thinking through it, but I've done a lot of wrong things in my life, and some of them were due to just not following the logical consequences, or realizing with common sense what would happen. Making mistakes that injured or killed. I guess that's life though--we all have to make mistakes and learn.
I think that the idea that the butterfly shouldn't be killed unless there is reason to kill it affirms that life has some value, and perhaps the butterfly is valuable just because it is alive. It's not threatening our lives unless it's like you have to swerve to get around it.
My friend made me think about that b/c I tend to swerve for squirrels and things and she (I suspect she might be a TJ) was like "if you crash the care and kill me, your best friend, for a squirrel--I am going to kill you!" So I was like...yeah, that's a tough choice, though there are things that'd be easier--like if it was a kid in the car (lol I'm such a bad person, but seriously there are different levels of "not worth it!". And that's also why I think ethics are ultimately subjective. Also, I never read Kant. But I also tend to drive carefully and slow so I hopefully never have to actually make that sort of choice--it's also why I don't really like driving and have panic attacks way to easily. lol