So why is the goal of utilitarianism to maximize the sum of utilities?
There are different kinds of utilitarianism. What they have in common is that they recommend maximising some measure of utility. Where they differ is in how that utility is measured, and how different people's utilities are combined. Summing is one way; averaging is another; maximining yet another.
Mathematical arguments can tell you that if a person's preferences have certain properties, a utility measure can be constructed for them (e.g. the VNM theorem). Mathematics can draw out non-obvious properties of proposed measures of utility. But no mathematical argument will tell you the right way to measure and combine utilities, any more than it will tell you that you should be a utilitarian in the first place.
But no mathematical argument will tell you the right way to measure and combine utilities . . .
Much the same could be said about potential probability functions.
I think what I'm looking for is some equivalent to Jaynes's "Desiderata" for probability, but in the realm of either basic utility functions or how to combine them.
. . . any more than it will tell you that you should be a utilitarian in the first place.
Being new to this, I'm also interested in a pointer to some kind of standard argument for (any kind of) utilitarianism. I mean some...
Previous thread
If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post (even in Discussion), then it goes here.
Notes for future OT posters:
1. Please add the 'open_thread' tag.
2. Check if there is an active Open Thread before posting a new one.
3. Open Threads should be posted in Discussion, and not Main.
4. Open Threads should start on Monday, and end on Sunday.