Utilitarianism

3min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

There is a point at which he says, well, fuck integrity. Why do you care so much about this cohesion of the person and their identity as a moral agent? And their projects. This is where I'm maybe you can help me out understanding why he thinks this is a defeating point. If you're going to bite the bullet, there has to be a you that's biting the bullet. There have to be a moral you. That's what utilitarianism is attacking. It's fracturing you as amoral agent to the degree that there's nothing left of you as a moral being to bite that bullet. The critique works either way, I think.

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: