Skip to main content

Pluralism and Consequentialism


 The great positive point for utilitarianism is … it is consequentialist. I do not see how any ethic can be rational if it is not consequentialist. In Star Wars Yoda understands this. It is precisely why he says that there is, for a jedi, no “try.” Either a consequence comes about, or it does not.

But the great negative point for utilitarianism is … it has a monistic view of the way consequences are to be evaluated. And this is true quite generally. Whether your preferred form of util is hedonistic, or based on a more abstract notion of satisfaction, whether you evaluate an act or a rule … utilitarianism posits some quality of the consequences of an action-or-rule, X, and says that more of X is always better than less of X.

But there is no X. Valuation is pluralistic. In the end we can’t say anything about those things that are good in themselves except that they are good in themselves.

Friendship, and more intimate relations, and bonding moments that make them or flow from them, are good. We perceive this intuitively. Artistic appreciation is also good. So, for that matter, is the feeling of being “in the flow” in a moment of artistic creativity. Yet these goods can tug against each other. (Do you want to get away from your easel and go spend more time with your boo?)

Further, our efforts to support and create these fundamental goods can lead to instrumental goods that also tug against each other. And here, too, since the goods sought are incommensurable, there is no X and no necessary “right answer.” That is where life gets its often-tragic character.

Labels:

Comments

  1. Paul D. Van PeltJune 22, 2022 at 10:58 AM

    Indeed, most anything worth anything in life is consequentialist. There was a post where religion was discussed along with the comparative happiness of religious people vs.others. Comments on the message posted were welcome, if and only if, one was a subscriber. Exceedingly consequentialist. I did not care. Here's the thing, though: utilitarianism is not for everyone. Was never, I think, imagined to be.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a maj...
9 comments
Read more

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak...
17 comments
Read more

Recent Controversies Involving Nassim Taleb, Part I

I've written about Nassim Taleb on earlier occasions in this blog. I'll let you do the search yourself, dear reader, for the full background. The short answer to the question "who is Taleb?" is this: he is a 57 year old man born in Lebanon, educated in France, who has been both a hedge fund manager and a derivatives trader. He retired from active participation from the financial world sometime between 2004 and 2006, and has been a full-time writer and provocateur ever since. Taleb's writings for the general public began where one might expect -- in the field where he had made his money -- and he explained certain financial issues to a broad audiences in a very dramatic non-technical way. Since then, he has widened has fields of study, writing about just about everything, applying the intellectual tools he honed in that earlier work. As you might have gather from the above, I respect Taleb, though I have sometimes been critical of him when my own writing ab...
4 comments
Read more