[flamerz]

I started living in my utilitarian manner a year or so ago, but I had no idea there was a name for it. The only thing we learned in my language arts class last year was writing, grammar, philosophy, and street smarts. IMO it's been the most useful class I've ever attended. Anyway, she inspired me to critically think. I came upon the thought that decisions should be based on what's best for everyone, rather than me. I hate when people act greedily when their tiny misfortune can be a huge benefit for others. So that's when I became a utilitarian. I had no idea there was a name for it, until tonight! I've been studying AP Euro, and it turns out that in 1764, Cesare Beccaria, an Italian philosophe, published a document that pretty much had these beliefs, only he wrote it to criticize law making and religion. It was defined in the textbook. This is possibly the most important (well, least useless) thing I've learned in AP Euro! God, I hate history.

Any other utilitarians in here? Any thoughts?

 

[uzziah]

Quote:

Originally Posted by flamerz /img/forum/go_quote.gif I started living in my utilitarian manner a year or so ago, but I had no idea there was a name for it. The only thing we learned in my language arts class last year was writing, grammar, philosophy, and street smarts. IMO it's been the most useful class I've ever attended. Anyway, she inspired me to critically think. I came upon the thought that decisions should be based on what's best for everyone, rather than me. I hate when people act greedily when their tiny misfortune can be a huge benefit for others. So that's when I became a utilitarian. I had no idea there was a name for it, until tonight! I've been studying AP Euro, and it turns out that in 1764, Cesare Beccaria, an Italian philosophe, published a document that pretty much had these beliefs, only he wrote it to criticize law making and religion. It was defined in the textbook. This is possibly the most important (well, least useless) thing I've learned in AP Euro! God, I hate history. Any other utilitarians in here? Any thoughts?

uhhh...........does everyone need to have a cause these days? are we that starved for something to believe in?

i'm not sure i know what you're saying; that you believe in helping others or that you believe in doing things simply, things that are useful, regardless of art or form?

you'll have to excuse me, but i feel like everyone is getting very high minded these days, but then again, i remember very well being that way myself

as long as your cause is helping others and not dropping bombs on them or cutting them (me) off on the freeway, i'm with you

 

[uzziah]

Quote:

Originally Posted by flamerz /img/forum/go_quote.gif Any other utilitarians in here?

i like **** that just works, and i like **** that's pretty so i'm both classical and romantic

utilitarian and...............not ....

 

[1967cutlass]

Quote:

Originally Posted by flamerz /img/forum/go_quote.gif God, I hate history.

You're a fool.

 

[flamerz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1967cutlass /img/forum/go_quote.gif You're a fool.

Heh. I understand the importance of it, but I find it extremely hard to study out of a textbook.

 

[MartinJ]

...

 

[kugino]

i actually prefer kantian (ethics) over utilitarianism...

 

[Fallingwater]

So what exactly does living in a utilitarian way mean? What's different? Is it just a matter of not being selfish?

 

[saint.panda]

One problem in utilitarianism is that happiness of different people is not commensurable, i.e. not measurable by common standard or units (minutes and hours are commensurable). If you take Bentham's utility calculus, there are problems such as the lack of subjective dependence of happiness, which depends on a person's creativity, spontaenity, etc. Even if two people are exposed to the same happiness potential for a given event, e.g. a party, happiness only becomes effective by utilizing this potential, which is something that cannot be juged obectively from an outsider's point of view. Further, for a given happiness potential there are always several courses of action that may lead to unforeseeable results. Finally, there are interpersonal preferences, which the the writer of the "happiness balance sheet" cannot possibly be aware of. In light of these problems, the utility calculus has to be insofar relativised that it loses most of its initial scope. There's also the imperialistic/paternalistic touch in utilitarianism which stands in contrast to an autonomous concept of happiness, which I believe in.

To base actions on what's best for everyone doesn't necessarily have to be utilitarian. Also, pursuing one's own happiness in a virtuos and conscious manner might as well lead to the same results as always thinking about what might be best for everyone else (as long as one keeps the world's imperfections in mind and counterbalances them).

For more utilitarianism you can read on Jeremy Bentham (famous) and also Peter Singer (a German, living utilitarian philosopher famous for his bioethics issues).

 

[Genetic]

What I'm looking for is a member who will find himself under a Kantian influence to sell me his Omega II but at an utilitarian price...

Amicalement

Quote:

Originally Posted by saint.panda /img/forum/go_quote.gif For more utilitarianism you can read on Jeremy Bentham (famous) and also Peter Singer (a German, living utilitarian philosopher famous for his bioethics issues).

LOL...By this he will find out what is going wrong with utilitatism...

 

[Blitzula]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1967cutlass /img/forum/go_quote.gif You're a fool.

Classy.

 

[Edwood]

LOL, anyone that is a dedicated member here is by definition, NOT a utilitarian.

-Ed

 

[Krug995]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Genetic /img/forum/go_quote.gif LOL...By this he will find out what is going wrong with utilitatism...

It's true, although I found his "Singer Solution to World Poverty" interesting and thought provoking at least. I suggest you read some Mill, he solves some of the initial problems Bentham has by introducing a qualitative component into the utility calculus. Also, for a more modern viewpoint, check out Brad Hooker and his theory of rule-consequentialism.

Deontology never really had any draw for me...it seems like Kant would rather you hated people but did your duties than being truly altruistic since he states that any act that you're either disposed to do or benefits you in any way is morally worthless...

I find myself being drawn more and more into virtue theory despite Aristotle's outdatedness and vagueness.

Now, back to writing my actual Moral Theory final paper rather than talking about it in an online forum...*sigh*...

 

[craiglester]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edwood /img/forum/go_quote.gif LOL, anyone that is a dedicated member here is by definition, NOT a utilitarian. -Ed

I suppose Bhuddism is out too..

 

[jbloudg20]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Genetic /img/forum/go_quote.gif What I'm looking for is a member who will find himself under a Kantian influence to sell me his Omega II but at an utilitarian price...

Exactly, the OP should spend all his money on headphones, then start a pass-around, because that would be better for all of us. Why should one persona have the nicest gear, when we all an share it?