chapotraphouse

13530 readers

166 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Utilitarianism is cringe (lemmygrad.ml)

submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

59 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Don't know if I am preaching to the choir, but with how much libs try to use the trolley problem to support their favorite war criminal, it got me thinking just how cringe utilitarianism is.

Whatever utilitarianism may be in theory, in practice, it just trains people to think like bureaucrats who belive themselves to be impartial observers of society (not true), holding power over the lives of others for the sake of the common good. It's imo a perfect distillation of bourgeois ideology into a theory of ethics. It's a theory of ethics from the pov of a statesman or a capitalist. Only those groups of people have the power and information necessary to actually act in a meaningfully utilitarian manner.

It's also note worthy just how prone to creating false dichotomies and ignoring historical context utilitarians are. Although this might just be the result of the trolley problem being so popular.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

'The ends justify the means' is actually a(n undeservedly-maligned) good take. The ends are a primary thing that determines what means are appropriate, and I'm not sure how anybody can argue against this.

Utilitarianism is just garbage that is no more insightful than vibes-based examination of actions.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This is exactly how I feel, and is only a problem to liberals (I mean philosophical liberals) who don't understand that certain ends can only be reached by certain means, and conversely certain means can never reach certain ends.

They live in a reality where "authoritarian" measures like a one-party state are just the personal preference of dictatorial leaders who are misguided or evil and who could have just chosen to be "good" instead, rather than those measures being the only way to survive the imperial onslaught.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

They are particularly silly when you realise that, by their logic (that appropriate means are not dictated by the ends), because it is appropriate to do a thing that achieves one goal, it is appropriate to do that thing to try to achieve every goal, as, by their logic, the appropriate means are independent of the ends.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Everyone always asks if the ends justify the means, but no one ever asks if the means actually make progress to the ends.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

That's why the ends are a primary (but not the only one, mind you) thing that dictates what means are appropriate.