10 ms·

Well, the utilitarianism has also stuck with me, and I lean that way on a lot of philosophical/ethical questions. I didn't really realize it until a few years a

Well, the utilitarianism has also stuck with me, and I lean that way on a lot of philosophical/ethical questions. I didn't really realize it until a few years ago while dating someone relatively well-known in utilitarian/rationality circles and had some eye-opening conversations with her and her friends about rights and the like (lots of things I'd never really thought through to their logical conclusions led to a softening of my stance on some stuff). I spent a lot of years being a natural rights libertarian, but when it comes down to it, I can't figure out where "rights" derive from. What's the first principle that says anyone has a "right" to anything? That's not to say I don't believe in civil rights as a just cause, or that human rights should be upheld, I just think they are a construct of sentient beings...not endowed by a creator or by nature. Utilitarianism has some reasonable answers on the question of rights, among other things. I understand the discomfort people feel in comparing humans to animals, but I found it challenging in a good way. I've always had serious doubts about the arguments people make about humans being unique; I haven't believed in a soul since I was a child. So, Singer's arguments, even the uncomfortable ones, weren't such a huge leap.

ExactoKnight 10y ago
Check out A Theory of Justice by John Rawls. Best challenge to Utilitarian thinking I know of. (E.g. slavery is wrong not because bad outweighs good, but rather because it is inherently wrong when seen from the perspective of the original position)
- Nomentatus 10y ago
  It's not uninteresting but it's a fast "argument" that really just dresses up George Moore's Intuitionism IMHO, which itself remains in disrespect. Google it, don't buy the book. It has many followers not because it's a great argument (assuming it qualifies as that) but because there simply aren't better arguments for Moore's side of the debate. I am biased though, I've met the man and we really didn't like one another, our values were far too opposed when we met. From my brief exposure, in life he seemed to be a mandarin who played the academic system expertly for his own benefit, with a public persona crafted to help with that. His private and public opinions could diverge to a staggering degree, but at least he did sometimes share some of his private opinions with youngsters, even if he wouldn't own them in any other context. A conscious hypocrite, I give him that.

ExactoKnight 10y ago

Check out A Theory of Justice by John Rawls. Best challenge to Utilitarian thinking I know of. (E.g. slavery is wrong not because bad outweighs good, but rather because it is inherently wrong when seen from the perspective of the original position)

Nomentatus 10y ago
It's not uninteresting but it's a fast "argument" that really just dresses up George Moore's Intuitionism IMHO, which itself remains in disrespect. Google it, don't buy the book. It has many followers not because it's a great argument (assuming it qualifies as that) but because there simply aren't better arguments for Moore's side of the debate. I am biased though, I've met the man and we really didn't like one another, our values were far too opposed when we met. From my brief exposure, in life he seemed to be a mandarin who played the academic system expertly for his own benefit, with a public persona crafted to help with that. His private and public opinions could diverge to a staggering degree, but at least he did sometimes share some of his private opinions with youngsters, even if he wouldn't own them in any other context. A conscious hypocrite, I give him that.