But utilitarianism is a moral system. How can it be amoral…? Its by definition a moral system. You could put fort the argument that it can sometimes reach immoral conclusions, but calling it amoral is just… mixing things up at best and being disingenuous at worse.
But utilitarianism is a moral system. How can it be amoral…? Its by definition a moral system. You could put fort the argument that it can sometimes reach immoral conclusions, but calling it amoral is just… mixing things up at best and being disingenuous at worse.
While funny, the hero could have done both: save them and register them as organ donors.
And let them push even more booze and junk food through those precious organs??
Because it’s not about persons or beings, it is about accounting towards a goal.
Pointing to a moral horizon in the future where things “balance out” is a tool to dismiss moral distinctions in the current, lived context.
Just because someone making such an argument identifies as a utilitarian doesn’t mean all utilitarians make flimsy arguments.
That’s true, but it’s my answer to the question about how it can be amoral. That’s how.