Preference utilitarianism isn't like total or average utilitarianism. There can't be a "repugnant conclusion" unless people prefer it.
-
-
Replying to @ProofOfLogic
True. There are people who do prefer the conclusion that has been described as repugnant, though. Me, for instance.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ModelOfTheory
@VesselOfSpirit Pref u. implies counter to the repug c.: don't add to a coalition unless it makes current members better off.2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ProofOfLogic @ModelOfTheory
i think the feature you describe is called "person-affecting" and is at least sort of orthogonal to pref U
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
and that people have tried to use "person-affecting morality" to get out of rep concl and it has other problems
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @VesselOfSpirit @ModelOfTheory
Oh I think person-affecting is way different from what I meant
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I read most of a paper on it, looks like it mostly means what I meant.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Which is what? In English
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Something like: morality has to do only with people who currently exist.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
A person-affecting morality has trouble accounting for concern for future generations.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.