Becoming Utilitarian

Sorry it cuts off midsentence.
Becoming utilitarian: misconception and blockages

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• utilitarian
• utilitarianism
• libertarian
• anti-state
• austrian economics
• mises
• anarchy

[BenettFreeman]

It seems to me that as you have been learning more and more about existing philosophical arguments you have changed your mind a number of times. This is great, the same could be said of myself. However, I cannot encourage you enough to look into the arguments against the set of ideas commonly packaged as 'utilitarianism', and consequentialist approaches in general. Attempting to describe choices and actions as 'right' or 'wrong' on the basis of information gathered AFTER the choice is made...

[lifeishowitis]

@BenettFreeman I know the arguments against utilitarianism very well, as I was avidly against it for a long time, and tried to address several of them in this video. I do not believe that praxeology consists of predictions of what *might* happen but of what will happen if certain means are used to achieve certain ends due to economic law.

I didn't find your comment about my speech patterns very helpful. I have no problem speaking on behalf of myself and those who agree with me.

[Thesocraticbreed]

I am a Utilitarian too. I think Objectivism is a lie of a philosophy. Reading Ayn Rand up next to J.S Mill, I saw how much Ayn Rand was a liar (attacking J.S Mill for "altruism" when it is not Altruism... you are looking out for your own good while for the others). However, I used to be a Communist until I read J.S Mill which ultimately lead me to becoming Minarchist and a Utilitarian. I am not a fan of Pragmatism either because there is no need if you are a Utilitarian.

[stcmsw102]

Great video. I think utilitarian arguments work to decide between different Pareto-optimal outcomes--in this sense I consider myself a utilitarian--but when individual utility must be decreased in order to maximize total utility, this has to be voluntary on their part to be morally justified. Regarding long-term consequences, to quote Keynes, "in the long run, we are all dead": that is, in practice (I think), the weight of short-term gains is greater than long-term losses in deciding utility.

[breakingthe4thwall]

I like using both. I know NAP is right at heart, but I like using utilitarian arguments.

[lifeishowitis]

@mattsamudio I don't disagree with you outside of your phrasing.

[mattsamudio]

@lifeishowitis Quantity and majority is what is not relevant.  Self-determination is the innate right of every human, and being outnumbered carries no justification for being deprived of that right, therefore 'good for more people' carries no logical relevance to 'what is right'. Further, it is logically immoral to use 'good for more people' as a justification for something when it requires deprivation of even one. Also, gauging morality by outcome carries some logical issues itself.

[BenettFreeman]

@lifeishowitis It is not the praxeological element of your approach which I was referring to. In terms of making predictions, I do believe there are ways of making more certain what will happen.

What I'm disagreeing with is your choice to decide what is 'right' and what is 'wrong' based on these predictions.

Lastly, I wasn't commenting on speech patterns. When you say 'we', it is obvious from the syntax of your sentences that you are not just referring to those who agree with you. :)

[BenettFreeman]

...or on PREDICTIONS of what those consequences MIGHT be, seems to me to be a total nullification of the philosophical process itself. I hope that you continue to investigate these matters further and that you discover the flaws of the ideas you appear to be advocating.

Oh, and you might want to reconsider the habit of constantly using 'we' to speak on behalf of everyone. Why not try speaking on behalf of your self?

[lifeishowitis]

@stealthswimmer Thanks! I'm happy you're having a good time and look forward to your response!