Right, I guess what I mean is that in an EA context, I’ve historically understood total utilitarianism to be total (an integral) across both time and space, rather than total in one dimension but not the other.
I think so too, because you can’t really talk about ethics without a timeframe. I wasn’t trying to argue that people don’t use timeframes, but rather that people automatically use total timeline utilitarianism without realizing that other options are even possible. This was what I was trying to get at by saying:
Usually when people talk about different types of utilitarianism they automatically presuppose “total timeline utilitarianism”. In fact, the current debate between total and average utilitarianism is actually a debate between “total total utilitarianism” and “total average utilitarianism”.
Right, I guess what I mean is that in an EA context, I’ve historically understood total utilitarianism to be total (an integral) across both time and space, rather than total in one dimension but not the other.
I think so too, because you can’t really talk about ethics without a timeframe. I wasn’t trying to argue that people don’t use timeframes, but rather that people automatically use total timeline utilitarianism without realizing that other options are even possible. This was what I was trying to get at by saying:
Got it, I must have just misread your post then! :) Thanks for your patience in the clarification!