3 ms·

Thanks, this was a really insightful comment (as someone who spent years of my life getting a graduate philosophy degree, before doing something more 'useful').

by samhw 5y ago

Thanks, this was a really insightful comment (as someone who spent years of my life getting a graduate philosophy degree, before doing something more 'useful'). I think the concept of utility is clearly, uh, useful, and the reason that it's aversive to people is that they tend to bundle it up with a lot of the (sociologically, not logically) related views, which tend to be more problematic. Hedonic utilitarianism in particular turns a lot of people off, and partly for good reason. I'm deeply ambivalent about it, and I think the surrounding debates, and the assumed primacy of moral intuition in applied cases, are far harder and more open questions than most people reckon. But I can still see how examples like utility monsters, or gang rape being morally superior to garden-variety rape because there are more people to enjoy it, might make people feel like it's really on the wrong path.

emn13 5y ago
Those examples are hilariously egregious, yeah! It's slightly taboo in polite conversation to see increased utility there, yep. Thanks for the kind words, too.
- samhw 5y ago
  No problem! And yeah, I had a moral philosophy professor who had endless examples like that, including that one. They were hilarious and so intuitively potent, I just wish I could remember more of them. He could spend a full 5-10 minutes in a lecture just retailing dozens of those ridiculous counter-examples. (It was especially funny because he was a very urbane old Oxonian professor - think Richard Dawkins for a pretty close analogue to his general mien - whom you wouldn't expect to start enthusiastically talking about gang rape.)
  - philipkglass 5y ago
    Philosophy professor John Holbo had a blog post about ridiculously whimsical scenarios in philosophy under the delightful title Occam's Phaser: https://crookedtimber.org/2012/02/25/occams-phaser/ https://crookedtimber.org/2012/02/25/occams-phaser/ There are good examples in the comments too, though I mostly recall it for getting into a heated argument with someone making utilitarian arguments for torture.
    - samhw 5y ago
      Interesting, thanks! My position on the whole 'using moral intuitions in applied cases to disprove fundamental moral theories' is basically what I said in this thread: https://twitter.com/samziz/status/1412198411579887622 https://twitter.com/samziz/status/1412198411579887622 Incidentally I wouldn't agree with utilitarian arguments for torture, but not - necessarily - because I don't agree with utilitarianism. I think it's certainly possible to make higher-order or rule-utilitarian arguments against torture, within the parameters of utilitarianism.

by samhw 5y ago

emn13 5y ago

Those examples are hilariously egregious, yeah! It's slightly taboo in polite conversation to see increased utility there, yep. Thanks for the kind words, too.

samhw 5y ago
No problem! And yeah, I had a moral philosophy professor who had endless examples like that, including that one. They were hilarious and so intuitively potent, I just wish I could remember more of them. He could spend a full 5-10 minutes in a lecture just retailing dozens of those ridiculous counter-examples. (It was especially funny because he was a very urbane old Oxonian professor - think Richard Dawkins for a pretty close analogue to his general mien - whom you wouldn't expect to start enthusiastically talking about gang rape.)
- philipkglass 5y ago
  Philosophy professor John Holbo had a blog post about ridiculously whimsical scenarios in philosophy under the delightful title Occam's Phaser: https://crookedtimber.org/2012/02/25/occams-phaser/ https://crookedtimber.org/2012/02/25/occams-phaser/ There are good examples in the comments too, though I mostly recall it for getting into a heated argument with someone making utilitarian arguments for torture.
  - samhw 5y ago
    Interesting, thanks! My position on the whole 'using moral intuitions in applied cases to disprove fundamental moral theories' is basically what I said in this thread: https://twitter.com/samziz/status/1412198411579887622 https://twitter.com/samziz/status/1412198411579887622 Incidentally I wouldn't agree with utilitarian arguments for torture, but not - necessarily - because I don't agree with utilitarianism. I think it's certainly possible to make higher-order or rule-utilitarian arguments against torture, within the parameters of utilitarianism.