I’ll have to think about that. I’ve been working on a response, but on consideration, perhaps it’s best to reserve “utilitarianism” for the act of evaluating world-states according to overall sentient affinity for those states.
Utilitarianism might say that X is bad insofar as people experience the badnesss of X. The sum total of badness that people subjectively experience from X determines how bad it is.
Deontology would reject that idea.
And it might be useful to have utilitarianism refuse to accept that “deontology might have a point,” and vice versa.
I’ll have to think about that. I’ve been working on a response, but on consideration, perhaps it’s best to reserve “utilitarianism” for the act of evaluating world-states according to overall sentient affinity for those states.
Utilitarianism might say that X is bad insofar as people experience the badnesss of X. The sum total of badness that people subjectively experience from X determines how bad it is.
Deontology would reject that idea.
And it might be useful to have utilitarianism refuse to accept that “deontology might have a point,” and vice versa.