AlexMennen comments on Humans are utility monsters - Less Wrong

67 Post author: PhilGoetz 16 August 2013 09:05PM

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

Comments (213)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: AlexMennen 17 August 2013 07:17:52PM 6 points [-]

You are correct that utilitarianism is a type of consequentialism, and that you can be a consequentialist without being a utilitarian. Consequentialism says that you should choose actions based on their consequences, which pretty much forces you into the VNM axioms, so consequentialism is roughly what you described as utilitarianism. As I said, it would make sense if that is what utilitarianism meant, but despite my opinions, utilitarianism does not mean that. Utilitarianism says that you should choose the action that results in the consequence that is best for all people in aggregate.

Comment author: DanArmak 17 August 2013 08:57:29PM 3 points [-]

I see. Thank you for clearing up the terminology.

Then what would the term be for a VNM-rational, moral anti-realist who explicitly considers others' welfare only because they figure in his utility function, and doesn't intrinsically care about their own utility functions?

Comment author: AlexMennen 17 August 2013 10:10:13PM 2 points [-]

I don't know of a commonly agreed-upon term for that, unfortunately. "Utility maximizer", "VNM-rational agent", and "homo economicus" are similar to what you're looking for, but none of these terms imply that the agent's utility function is necessarily dependent on the welfare of others.

Comment author: Juno_Watt 19 August 2013 03:00:55PM 1 point [-]

Rational self-interest?

Comment author: Jack 19 August 2013 02:02:03PM 1 point [-]

Then what would the term be for a VNM-rational, moral anti-realist who explicitly considers others' welfare only because they figure in his utility function, and doesn't intrinsically care about their own utility functions?

"Utilitarian" and all the other labels in normative ethics are labels for what ought to be in an agent's utility function. So I would call this person someone who rightly stopped caring about normative philosophy.

Comment author: blacktrance 23 August 2013 05:49:34AM 0 points [-]

To use an Objectivist term, it's a person who's acting in his "properly understood self-interest".

Comment author: Lukas_Gloor 19 August 2013 01:36:58AM 0 points [-]

Utilitarianism says that you should choose the action that results in the consequence that is best for all people in aggregate.

Not just people but all the beings that serve as "vessels" for whatever it is that matters (to you). According to most common forms of utilitarianism, "utility" consists of happiness and/or (the absence of) suffering or preference satisfaction/frustration.