4 ms·

> No, but when asked about utilitarianism, you go to utilitarian genocide. I was talking about utilitarianism with regards to quantifying human lives, not stri

> No, but when asked about utilitarianism, you go to utilitarian genocide. I was talking about utilitarianism with regards to quantifying human lives, not strictly utilitarianism in general. I believe cases from the past where utilitarianism, with regards to quantifying human lives, was used to justify objectively bad things like genocide or sterilization deserve to be considered. Again, these are my beliefs, I'm not out to slander others. > And is the time-cube guy considered representative of science? Given that people with power and authority have used the utilitarian principle to justify bad things, along with the prevalence of such arguments today, makes this an unfair comparison. Timecube guy has no authority or serious adherents to his ideas.

Chris2048 10y ago
> I believe cases from the past where utilitarianism, with regards to quantifying human lives, was used to justify objectively bad things like genocide or sterilization deserve to be considered. There's bad utilitarianism, much like there's bad science; bad science isn't science at all. That people claimed their intentions were pure doesn't mean we have to accept that they were, and that we might be skeptical towards claims of utilitarianism as justifications for inhumanities doesn't suggest much about utilitarianism itself to me. > I'm not out to slander others. What I mean by this, is if you characterise utilitarianism as a justification for the above, people who support utilitarianism appear to be supporters of a terrible ideology, whereas those are cases are all deeply flawed, and not a fair representative of utilitarianism. > people with power and authority have used the utilitarian principle to justify bad things The comment was a response to "people on the internet" supporting terrible utilitarianism. they also have little authority. Terrible things where done by doctors in the past, this says little about modern medical practice.

Chris2048 10y ago

> I believe cases from the past where utilitarianism, with regards to quantifying human lives, was used to justify objectively bad things like genocide or sterilization deserve to be considered. There's bad utilitarianism, much like there's bad science; bad science isn't science at all. That people claimed their intentions were pure doesn't mean we have to accept that they were, and that we might be skeptical towards claims of utilitarianism as justifications for inhumanities doesn't suggest much about utilitarianism itself to me. > I'm not out to slander others. What I mean by this, is if you characterise utilitarianism as a justification for the above, people who support utilitarianism appear to be supporters of a terrible ideology, whereas those are cases are all deeply flawed, and not a fair representative of utilitarianism. > people with power and authority have used the utilitarian principle to justify bad things The comment was a response to "people on the internet" supporting terrible utilitarianism. they also have little authority. Terrible things where done by doctors in the past, this says little about modern medical practice.