- #1
superwolf
- 181
- 0
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v446/n7138/abs/nature05631.html
Very interesting article. I'm not proud of being an utilitarian anymore.
Very interesting article. I'm not proud of being an utilitarian anymore.
I think I maybe don't have a brain damage after all. I would have if I didn't have emotional opposition to utilitarian choices, but all I am doing is listening to reason instead of irrational feelings. It feels wrong, but I cannot find reasonable arguments to defend my feelings (but plenty to disregard them), and therefore I have no other choice than to remain utilitarian if I want to stay rational.
Maybe avoiding pain isn't rational, but if you accept that it is, utilitarianism is more rational than any other ethical system, because a universal perspective is more coherent than a subjective one.
Maybe avoiding pain isn't rational, but if you accept that it is, utilitarianism is more rational than any other ethical system, because a universal perspective is more coherent than a subjective one.
Taking them into consideration is not the same as giving them equal value.If you want to talk about ethics at all, you have to take all interests into considerations, not just your own.
If you are saying we should minimize it, you are indeed ascribing a negative value to it.And I'm not saying that pain is always bad, I'm saying that we should try to minimize it.
Taking them into consideration is not the same as giving them equal value.
If you are saying we should minimize it, you are indeed ascribing a negative value to it.
The problem with utilitarianism is that it doesn't really tell us much. Pain is bad, pleasure is good, are useful generalizations, but when you apply them to specifics, it becomes completely subjective. Everyone will give you a different interpretation of how much pain is acceptable, and what isn't, and who if anyone should suffer. Its not really a standard at all.
Tyrrany of the majority is not automatically a bad thing. For example, having all traffic signs in the USA posted in English is a good thing. (And they would be completely unusable if we tried to cater to all the minorities, or even just a few of them!)Utilitarianism is a useful ethical strategy, but adhering to it as a moral foundation leads to things like the tyranny of the majority
Hurkyl said:Tyrrany of the majority is not automatically a bad thing. For example, having all traffic signs in the USA posted in English is a good thing. (And they would be completely unusable if we tried to cater to all the minorities, or even just a few of them!)
Tyrrany of the majority is not automatically a bad thing. For example, having all traffic signs in the USA posted in English is a good thing. (And they would be completely unusable if we tried to cater to all the minorities, or even just a few of them!)
It's not automatically a good thing either, it's all relative. If in 100 years the muslim population in the US becomes majority, would it be ok to impose the sharia?
Fear of pain is natural, always giving into that fear is cowardice.Only those sharia laws that don't cause suffering.