You call it trivial, but the second sentence says, "Its usage has evolved significantly over time"; both can't be true. And the criticism section makes some goo

You call it trivial, but the second sentence says, "Its usage has evolved significantly over time"; both can't be true. And the criticism section makes some good points: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility#Discussion_and_criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility#Discussion_and_critici... I also think there are a number of questionable assumptions behind it, and even your simple version of a supposedly trivial concept doesn't match the current official definition well. So to me this isn't so much an obvious fact about the world as a synthetic cornerstone to a worldview. Sort of like Peano's construction of the integers, or the way theists talk about the things that are "pretty basic" to their religion. Those things feel trivial to their adherents, of course. But the rest of us can find sweeping dismissals like yours as very offputting.