Try negative utilitarianism, it's much more consistent. Pleasure is overrated.
Why I am not a utilitarian
101–102 of 102 posts
Re: Why I am not a utilitarian
#102Earlier quoted context omitted.
The question of how one actually resolves the utility calculation (once weighing bases are determined) is a question of applied ethics, not normative ethics. Consider: it could be entirely consistent for a Utilitarian to make the utility justified decision that utility calculus is outside of their capability, and a Deontological framework would serve as their best in-situ heuristic. They would still be a Utilitarian,…
What exactly is the point of utilitarianism then? What can you say about utilitarianism itself? Under this scheme, it seems to possess no qualities.
Well that depends on what you want to do - if you're trying to interpret an applied conundrum, it provides a framework for accepting or rejecting justifications towards that question. It doesn't necessarily prescribe a solution, but provides a metric for evaluation of a solution's justification.
Alternatively, on a normative level, you can still debate the merits of the framework when compared to other systems (deontological - virtue - care - etc.) by beginning with meta-ethical axioms and resolving them to normative positions. Consider an ontological framework which doesn't recognize free will of others - this could dramatically inform a delimma between a utilitarian system and an egoist one.