There is no context where you can imply utilitarian is synonymous with valuing human life dude. You have a problem with admitting when you're wrong. Illustrated well by this thread
[QUOTE=Perfumly;47959012]There is no context where you can imply utilitarian is synonymous with valuing human life dude. You have a problem with admitting when you're wrong. Illustrated well by this thread[/QUOTE]
I don't even know what you're referring to, if you read the definition I posted it states clearly that it's a doctrine that promotes happiness amongst the greatest number of people, calm down.
I feel the word happiness in that definition is a little misplaced, as happiness has no baring on utility, or a doctrine based on utility. A better word would be "well-being", but yes the picture you posted does say happiness
[QUOTE=Perfumly;47959119]I feel the word happiness in that definition is a little misplaced, as happiness has no baring on utility, or a doctrine based on utility. A better word would be "well-being", but yes the picture you posted does say happiness[/QUOTE]
The philosophy of utilitarianism is well understood to view the greatest happiness amongst the most people to be the highest good, I was just saying that I do not subscribe to it at all.
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47959139]The philosophy of utilitarianism is well understood to view the greatest happiness amongst the most people to be the highest good, I was just saying that I do not subscribe to it at all.[/QUOTE]
True enough, since you only work for happiness of yourself and people like you.
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47959139]The philosophy of utilitarianism is well understood to view the greatest happiness amongst the most people to be the highest good, I was just saying that I do not subscribe to it at all.[/QUOTE]
So are overflowing prisons and numerous unneeded arrests a sign of happiness amongst the most people then?
[QUOTE=NikoChekhov;47959147]So are overflowing prisons and numerous unneeded arrests a sign of happiness amongst the most people then?[/QUOTE]
No?
The first paragraph of the Wikipedia page on utilitarianism is "Utilitarianism is a theory in normative ethics holding that the moral action is the one that maximizes utility. Utility is defined in various ways, including as pleasure, economic well-being and the lack of suffering. Utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, which implies that the "end justifies the means"."
So I suppose if you switch pleasure with happiness that would be one application of it, but I don't think that it's really the most common or most well understood application of utilitarianism as a doctrine.
Agree to disagree I suppose, I just would t ever use the word that way, lol.
Utilitarianism, as I am most familiar with it, is the doctrine of thought that provides the best economic returns.
I figured, that the system of maximized economic returns is one that would appeal to someone like bigfatworm as that's seemingly the thing he's most concerned about in this discussion.
Yeah that's what I figured as well.
Also I would like to apologize for getting feisty and worked up. I'm just dick hurt because I'm at work and work blows
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;47958443]You sound really smart inside your head don't you? Anyways, you might have missed the last part when I said I don't agree with this bill.[/QUOTE]
You don't agree with the bill but you say that there's no way to responsibly use any drug other than alcohol and marijuana, which is pretty much entirely false. How do you expect to deal with substance abuse properly if you go into it with the preconceived notion that everyone you need to help is just irresponsible?
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;47959304]Utilitarianism, as I am most familiar with it, is the doctrine of thought that provides the best economic returns.
I figured, that the system of maximized economic returns is one that would appeal to someone like bigfatworm as that's seemingly the thing he's most concerned about in this discussion.[/QUOTE]
Economic returns are important, but not everything. When I talk about the interests of the state I go beyond mere budgetary matters.
You deal with an ephemeral moral/cultural stability related most strongly to a christian society. In either case, I disagree
I am not sure why some people instantly think its economically a bad idea to do this.
Alive people can make money for the government, death people don't. And people with HIV or Hepatitis are less likely to do so, and these deceases are a health concern for everybody and not just drug addicts themselves.
There are multiple studies on why and how doing this is economically beneficial,
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3710233/[/url]
[url]http://www.sydneymsic.com/images/resources/pdfs/MSIC_Final_Report_26_9_08_Saha.pdf[/url]
And also,
[quote]The only comprehensive evaluation of a medically
supervised injecting centre was conducted during the
18 month trial of the Sydney centre.6 Staff intervened
in 329 overdoses over one year with an estimate of at
least four lives saved a year. There was no increase in
reported hepatitis B or C infections in the area that the
medically supervised injecting centre served despite an
increase elsewhere in Sydney.
The report described a decreased frequency of
injecting related problems among clients. Half the centre’s
clients reported that their injecting practices had
become less risky since using the centre. Furthermore,
clients were more likely than other injectors to report
that they had started treatment for their drug use; 11%
of clients were referred to treatment for drug dependence.
An economic evaluation of deaths averted by
intervention of the medically supervised injecting centre
showed that costs were comparable to those of
other widely accepted public health measures.
The centre also had benefits for the local
community. Residents and business respondents
reported fewer sightings of public injection and
syringes discarded in public places, and syringe counts
in the vicinity of the centre were lower after it opened
than before. In addition, there was no evidence of an
increased number of theft and robbery incidents in the
area. Acceptance of the medically supervised injecting
centre increased among both businesses and residents
over the study period.[/quote]
Harper screws up again what a surprise.
[QUOTE=Cold;47963117]I am not sure why some people instantly think its economically a bad idea to do this.
Alive people can make money for the government, death people don't. And people with HIV or Hepatitis are less likely to do so, and these deceases are a health concern for everybody and not just drug addicts themselves.
There are multiple studies on why and how doing this is economically beneficial,
[url]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3710233/[/url]
[url]http://www.sydneymsic.com/images/resources/pdfs/MSIC_Final_Report_26_9_08_Saha.pdf[/url]
And also,[/QUOTE]
Live people can also cost the state money depending on how productive they are.
[QUOTE=coldroll5;47963145]Harper screws up again what a surprise.[/QUOTE]
This should be the last season of Tory in the House.
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47963427]Live people can also cost the state money depending on how productive they are.[/QUOTE]
Yes and people with cirrhosis or various other alcohol related diseases are clearly the superior of the addicts
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47963427]Live people can also cost the state money depending on how productive they are.[/QUOTE]
And ... ?
No death person has ever been economically beneficial.
You can't threat based on a snapshot either, just because somebody costs the state money right now, doesn't meant they will in the future.
[QUOTE=Cold;47964032]And ... ?
No death person has ever been economically beneficial.
You can't threat based on a snapshot either, just because somebody costs the state money right now, doesn't meant they will in the future.[/QUOTE]
Doesn't mean that they're necessarily likely to change either.
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47959139]The philosophy of utilitarianism is well understood to view the greatest happiness amongst the most people to be the highest good, I was just saying that I do not subscribe to it at all.[/QUOTE]
"Fuck other people, unless they listen to my skydaddy they're not worth helping"
For real, this is literally all I get from any posts you make. You're nowhere near as good a human being as you seem to think you are. Everybody deserves help, drug addicts, criminals, the sick and frail. Everybody. Denying them based on some "objective morals" that you seem to think exist without question is dumb and promotes inequality in society. Something we as a species have been trying to fix for millennia.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;47966076]Everybody deserves help, drug addicts, criminals, the sick and frail. Everybody. Denying them based on some "objective morals" that you seem to think exist without question is dumb and promotes inequality in society. Something we as a species have been trying to fix for millennia.[/QUOTE]
Inequality isn't necessarily a bad thing and we have most certainly not been trying get rid of it for millennia.
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47966189]Inequality isn't necessarily a bad thing and we have most certainly not been trying get rid of it for millennia.[/QUOTE]
...therefore people should suffer and die for my religion.
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47966189]Inequality isn't necessarily a bad thing and we have most certainly not been trying get rid of it for millennia.[/QUOTE]
Nah we've been trying to get rid of it for the last couple o'hundred years at least, though I'll argue you could trace it back longer than that.
Whether we've been trying to get rid of it for millennia or not, shouldn't we?
[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;47966616]Nah we've been trying to get rid of it for the last couple o'hundred years at least, though I'll argue you could trace it back longer than that.
Whether we've been trying to get rid of it for millennia or not, shouldn't we?[/QUOTE]
In terms of explicit movements trying to preach a message of equality? Yes, the past 200-300 years have seen that. However, to see it popularized so much amongst common folk is a thing of the past 60 years, maybe even less.
In any case, I don't see what's so inherently bad about inequality, it seems like it's just used as a big bad scary word most of the time.
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47966669]In terms of explicit movements trying to preach a message of equality? Yes, the past 200-300 years have seen that. However, to see it popularized so much amongst common folk is a thing of the past 60 years, maybe even less.
In any case, I don't see what's so inherently bad about inequality, it seems like it's just used as a big bad scary word most of the time.[/QUOTE]
That's your problem because inequality is bad, especially when we have the resources to fix it. When others think that they're better than someone else it promotes bigotry, hate and inequality. Everyone was born on this earth without a choice and there is no reason to put others down because you see yourself as a better person than them. If everyone had an equal shot at life like some of us do then you would see general advancements in the quality of life for everyone, including yourself. The desire to help others is a natural human emotion that promotes the growth and improvement of our species and culture as a whole. Culture is a product of society and will be only that. You can't protect culture because it can't be protected in the first place. If society moves towards different ideals and the majority opinion changes then culture will change with it.
[QUOTE=reedbo;47966824]That's your problem because inequality is bad, especially when we have the resources to fix it. When others think that they're better than someone else it promotes bigotry, hate and inequality. Everyone was born on this earth without a choice and there is no reason to put others down because you see yourself as a better person than them. If everyone had an equal shot at life like some of us do then you would see general advancements in the quality of life for everyone, including yourself. The desire to help others is a natural human emotion that promotes the growth and improvement of our species and culture as a whole. Culture is a product of society and will be only that. You can't protect culture because it doesn't need to be protected in the first place.[/QUOTE]
That's funny, most attempts to make people equal has involved stripping people of their higher places in society and redistributing wealth so that everyone is stuck in the same shitty situation.
Go into any maternity ward and tell me what's fair or equal about one child being born able-bodied while another is born without legs and their head locked to their twin. You can help the disadvantaged without sawing of your own legs to give to them.
The fact of the matter is that equality has never been expressed in nature or in any form of human civilization worth a damn. This is getting off topic however, so I'll have to cease with this discussion.
[editline]blah[/editline]
At least here that is.
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47966861]That's funny, most attempts to make people equal has involved stripping people of their higher places in society and redistributing wealth so that everyone is stuck in the same shitty situation.
Go into any maternity ward and tell me what's fair or equal about one child being born able-bodied while another is born without legs and their head locked to their twin. You can help the disadvantaged without sawing of your own legs to give to them.
The fact of the matter is that equality has never been expressed in nature or in any form of human civilization worth a damn. This is getting off topic however, so I'll have to cease with this discussion.
[editline]blah[/editline]
At least here that is.[/QUOTE]
But you see. That's what makes us better than nature. We can actually do something about it. Are you against modern medicine now because it's giving less able bodied people a shot at making a difference in this world? Or are you supporting the removal of safe injections sites that help prevent the spread of disease and infection because it takes money out of your pocket? That's like saying we shouldn't help others because nature made it that way in the first place. When we as a species have the technology and resources to do good for everyone then what's the point in living in society. I'm sorry bub but this is the price you pay to live with the rest of us.
[QUOTE=reedbo;47966926]But you see. That's what makes us better than nature. We can actually do something about it. Are you against modern medicine now because it's giving less able bodied people a shot at making a difference in this world? Or are you supporting the removal of safe injections sites that help prevent the spread of disease and infection because it takes money out of your pocket?[/QUOTE]
Just because we can do something about it does not make it a productive use of our time or resources. Stop pretending these people are just waiting to be saved so that they can land a space module on Mars or cure cancer.
I'm against safe injection sites because they bring a despicable activity into the public square, thus destigmatizing it and making the associated behaviour more acceptable.
[QUOTE=bIgFaTwOrM12;47966972]Just because we can do something about it does not make it a productive use of our time or resources. Stop pretending these people are just waiting to be saved so that they can land a space module on Mars or cure cancer.
I'm against safe injection sites because they bring a despicable activity into the public square, thus destigmatizing it and making the associated behaviour more acceptable.[/QUOTE]
Safe injection sites aren't promoting addiction and you're an idiot if you believe that. The primary goal for these sites is to prevent and rehabilitate addicts in a safe environment in order to provide an able citizen for the rest of society. When you don't have people to do the small things in society you wouldn't be able to accomplish anything worthwhile. You don't have any proof that these safe injection sites are promoting this behavior or even destigmatizing it, that's just what you [I]feel[/I]. When you actually have a point I may feel like arguing with you but when all you've got is "it's promoting bad behavior!1!!" I can't take you seriously. People don't want to be addicted to substances that's just how the human brain works. It's just processing chemicals.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
