I don't think that utilitarianism specifically as an ethical doctrine is required for a desire to shift one's priority to make charitable donations more effective. I really believe that the point of morality is to make the world a better place. What utilitarianism means is having these specific guides to action that are willing, in which you're willing to do calculations solely based on maximizing happiness.
David and Tamler take a break from complaining about psychological studies that measure utilitarianism to complain about the moral theory itself. We talk about one of the most famous critiques of utilitarian theories from Bernard Williams. Does utilitarianism annihilate our integrity--our unity--as people? Would trying to maximize well-being fracture our identities, and swallow up our projects, motivations, and moral convictions--the same convictions that make utilitarianism seem appealing in the first place? Is it ultimately self-defeating as a moral theory?
Plus, we talk about the adventures of Tamler's based step-mom Christina Hoff Sommers' at Lewis and Clark law school. Will David stay woke?
Support Very Bad Wizards
Links: