Emile comments on [POLL] Do You Feel Oppressed? - Less Wrong

6 Post author: maia 03 May 2012 02:42AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (28)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Emile 03 May 2012 06:14:22AM 1 point [-]

I find it hard to imagine in what context utilitarianism is a controversial view met with social disapproval (and not just intellectual disagreement). Does anybody have an example of a "utilitarian" statement that might cause neighbours or coworkers to express outrage or disapproval?

Comment author: MileyCyrus 03 May 2012 07:00:44AM *  13 points [-]

Do you have any religious friends?

In my experience, when religious people hear "utilitarianism" they:

  • A) Have no idea what it means.
  • B) Think that it means "ruthlessly chase power and wealth for yourself, with no concern for the well-being of others."
  • C) If they're educated they'll point to examples of people who justified atrocities with "the ends justifies the means." (ex, Mao's Great Leap Forward)

Unpopular utilitarian beliefs:

  • A) Someone with a high earning job should donate money to charity instead of volunteering.
  • B) The only reason I shouldn't rob a bank and the money to an efficient charity is because doing so will decrease net utility in the world.
  • C) By diverting money from more efficient charities, the Make-A-Wish foundation does more harm than good.
Comment author: Emile 03 May 2012 09:06:54AM *  6 points [-]

Do you have any religious friends?

A few, but the "religious" here in France are milder than what you'd get in the states. The most religious people I know are Muslim.

If they're educated they'll point to examples of people who justified atrocities with "the ends justifies the means." (ex, Mao's Great Leap Forward)

That's a very reasonable answer! "The end justifies the means" is a common rationalization for terrible behavior (though probably not as much as it is in fiction).

  • A) Someone with a high earning job should donate money to charity instead of volunteering.
  • B) The only reason I shouldn't rob a bank and the money to an efficient charity is because doing so will decrease net utility in the world.
  • C) By diverting money from more efficient charities, the Make-A-Wish foundation does more harm than good.

Thanks for the examples, these make sense, though they seem somewhat tame (I would expect stronger disagreement and conflict over issues like how to raise kids, abortion, dealing with crime, race, globalization, immigration, taxes, nuclear power, the rich/poor divide, divorce, etc.)

But then, I don't go around telling people "I'm a utilitarian" anyway - unlike atheism, I don't see how it would come up in normal conversation (i.e. if someone disagrees with me about the relative merits of donations and volunteering, I don't expect them to say "but that means ... you're a Utilitarian!").

Comment author: khafra 03 May 2012 12:59:53PM 7 points [-]

With some things, the label is less popular than the substance--like (in the US) saying you're a socialist is much more offensive than praising a worker-owned company. Utilitarianism is the opposite way, the unpopular part is being utilitarian, not saying you're a utilitarian.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 03 May 2012 05:06:29PM 1 point [-]

Try bringing up trolley problems among the general population and see how they respond.

Comment author: Emile 03 May 2012 08:29:21PM 0 points [-]

It's true that I don't go around telling people that pushing a fat man onto the tracks to save five lives is the right thing to do, because I don't think it's the right thing to do.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 03 May 2012 11:50:16PM 0 points [-]

What I mean is try to suggest that even it might maybe be the right thing, or that it might be at least a worthwhile question and see how people respond.

Comment author: prase 04 May 2012 05:53:29PM 0 points [-]

For what it's worth, I have explicitly asked my friends about their opinions about the Trolley problem, and as far as I remember most of them would push the fat man without hesitation.

Comment author: thomblake 16 May 2012 03:17:50PM 0 points [-]

I don't believe them.

Most people I've met would hesitate to perform the "pushing a fat man" action regardless of context. Think about what you'd have to do to physically push him onto the tracks. Make sure to picture your arms wrapped around him as you tackle him, the fabric of his tweed jacket abrading your face, your nose filled with his sweat, his cries of surprise and alarm and protestations all you can hear above the noise of the trolley as you strain against his bulk.

I believe all of that would be readily apparent in the moment, and most people would hesitate. But maybe I'm just thinking of northeasterners.

Comment author: prase 16 May 2012 07:18:54PM 0 points [-]

"Would push the fat man without hesitation" was lazy formulation on my part. They said without hesitation that pushing the fat man was the morally preferable choice, not that they would be able to act according to this belief.

Comment author: thomblake 16 May 2012 07:33:49PM 0 points [-]

Aha. An important distinction.