(ELO) Compassion is a more worthwhile human trait than intelligence

Resolved: Compassion is a more worthwhile human trait than intelligence C1: Ethical Implementation 1. Consequentialism and Utilitarianism. Intelligence is more important in this this respect in that both forms of ethics collapse down to some type of decision calculus. A decision calculus depends on intelligence and not compassion. This is true because to come up with a decision calculus assumes rational thought and other mental processes none of which need compassion. On the contrary, compassion assumes a mode of feeling which would actually impair the consequential decision calculus. Take the famous trolley example. You have the ability to keep a trolley on one path which would kill 5 people. Or you can switch the track and have the trolley hit 1 person. I argue that intelligence is the most important trait here because the decision calculus would lead the person to switch the track and kill the 1 person instead of the 5. Compassion however would cloud this rational thought process and put doubt into the mind of the individual since then the moral burden is to proactively flip the switch which would lead to someone's death. Now is it possible to make the rational decision and kill the 1 person with compassion? Yes. But the impact on the round for this is 3-fold. First, you still would vote Con because both would still be equally important. Two, compassion would increase the timeframe of the action because of clouds of doubt which could be enough time to hit the 5 people. Third, intelligence would always outweigh because the rational decision process would always vie on the quantitative side whereas compassion might not. 2. Discourse Ethics. In short discourse ethics is a communicative ethical deductive system. Its basis derives from the fact that the deduction of ethical normative facts is predicated upon argumentation and discourse. This system seeks to address flaws found within Kantian deontological ethics. Which, it does. But, I digress. This system argues that since it is impossible to have moral norms within an isolated individual sphere, i.e. it is predicated upon human interaction and discourse, then moral norms can only be valid intersubjectively. Thus, intelligence supersedes compassion in this realm of discourse ethics because it is based on communicative rationality which is a major aspect of the definition of intelligence. C2: Innovation Insofar as intelligence is the root of innovation, you will always vie on the side of intelligence first since it is the basis of all progress, advancement, etc. This includes but is not limited to medicine, innovative-capitalism, and other scientific progress. Without innovation, compassion means nothing because compassion cannot be allocated except on an individual basis. Thus, macro impacts of compassion would be void. Thus the efficacy of compassion is based first on intelligence. AND if this is rejected: C3: Compassion before intelligence results in socialism It is true that intent does not mean good ends. Compassion before intelligence will result in socialist-type scenarios. This is true because the "compassionate ones" want a quick fix to society's issues. And since a large portion of society is not well-read in economic theory or political theory then socialism or forms of social planning will be seen as desirable. AND socialism is a flawed economic model which will result in more harm. Summers, former president of Harvard and former Secretary of the Treasury argues that large scale social planning and federal spending results in the following harm: (1) the "crowding out" effect of investment, (2) lower productivity, (3) higher interest rates, (4) lower investments and (5) cycle of more public spending. Dorsch elucidates more harms: (1) dollar dumping by countries especially China and (2) hyperinflation. This will turn any benefit of the Pro because it has the biggest impact of society as a whole and thus individuals working within that system.