Utilitarianism

Guybrush · 05-11-2021, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor

Ok but let's assume we can reduce freedom in exchange for happiness

should we always do this?

Sure. This is generally what we do as a society. For example we remove the freedom to very drunkenly drive because it causes more pain and suffering than we like.

Flipping it, I'm pretty sure that by applying a utilitarian comb to your laws, you could probably remove some laws that have no or even an overall adverse effect on happiness.

The Batlord · 05-11-2021, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor

This is totally reasonable

but I'd argue there are cases where we wouldn't do this precisely because Freedom has inherent value

for instance, initiatives to reduce consumption of sugary drinks, would certainly make people happier in the long term

however liberals get mocked for it, because it's too cynically utilitarian

And so the real purpose of stanning Bloomberg is revealed.

~~jwb~~ · 05-12-2021, 02:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

And so the real purpose of stanning Bloomberg is revealed.

it's very similar to his statement that the death penalty for drink driving would clearly lead to better outcomes/less harm...

The problem with these hypotheticals is not even that they're hypothetical it's that you're presuming that these policies would actually lead to better outcomes when there has been no substantiation of that claim

Like someone in 1920 could've said with the same amount of confidence "clearly banning alcohol will lead to better outcomes for society..." But that's not at all what happened. The outcomes were drastically worse. Cracking down on xyz can inadvertently lead to even bigger problems than the initial problem that caused the crackdown in the first place.

Guybrush · 05-12-2021, 01:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor

This is totally reasonable

but I'd argue there are cases where we wouldn't do this precisely because Freedom has inherent value

for instance, initiatives to reduce consumption of sugary drinks, would certainly make people happier in the long term

however liberals get mocked for it, because it's too cynically utilitarian

It's kinda interesting to see how this word freedom seems to have special meaning to americans (?). Is "loaded" the right word for it?

It seems you automatically apply a lot of virtue to the word. I think over here, the word doesn't quite have as much connotation and we're well aware that there's good freedom and bad freedom.