The whole Otonashi debate essentially boils down to a difference of ideologies.
Consider this thought experiment:
You are in a large house full of all sorts of people, and you all have fun together every day, but never go outside.
One day, you realise that the whole house is filled with some sort of harmless arbitrary drug-gas substance that makes everyone who breathes it feel happy.
You tell this to people, but most of them say they're happy in the house and don't want to leave, they don't mind staying in the house for the rest of their lives breathing in this 'synthetic' happiness, even though you know that if they leave the house, they could go into the world and possibly find a real, much better happiness for themselves.
Do you try and convince them to leave the house, or do you just leave them?
Otonashi would try and get them to leave. People who disagree with Otonashi wouldn't.
It's a matter of positive liberty (See Isaiah Berlin's 1958 essay "Two Concepts of Liberty"); granting people the ability to fulfill their potential rather than letting them stay in limbo.
Joly:
It's called
Applied Phlebotinum.