Consequentialism and Utilitarianism

On consequentialist and utilitarian ethics. #ethics #philosophy

[darkengine]

I consider myself a consequentialist in that I have no idea how to evaluate the possible decisions available to me without predicting the likely consequences and evaluating their desirability. Yet the type of probable consequences I factor in and evaluate seems so different from most philosophical discussions.

I relate it somewhat to health. I'm a consequentialist about health. If I attempt to engage in a healthy lifestyle, it's with a consequentialist hope of living a healthy life as opposed to being chronically ill. Yet I'm relatively clueless about what is healthy! When I was growing up, low-fat diets were the trend. Now fats don't seem to be considered so unhealthy while sugar seems to be considered among the worst things we can frequently ingest in abundance.

So I'm navigating so many unknowns which convolute my abilities to even predict the most likely consequences of my choices. I'm also dealing with probabilities, not guarantees. Kale does seem like a superfood in the plant category given how it absorbs so many micronutrients, but I might die tomorrow choking on kale; there are no guarantees even if we're correct about the health benefits of kale in living longer. Exercising seems healthy but I might get hit by a car tomorrow on the way to the gym. All I can do is attempt to optimize my chances of living a healthy life while navigating a sea of unknowns.

I look at morality the same way. For example, it seems "healthier" (and therefore seems more "moral") to err on the side of treating other humans respectfully. I maximize my chances of making allies who seek to aid me and minimize my chances of making enemies who would seek to harm me that way. So I would argue notions like the Golden Rule and favoring cooperation over hostility as seemingly optimal from a strictly consequentialist perspective.

However, suppose I had an omnipotent, superhuman ability to see into all possible futures and knew with certainty that aiding a neighbor would result in him murdering me and my family. Then the consequentialist in me would not be able to see that as a moral action in the same sense that I would not consider it a healthy action to eat kale if I could predict with certainty that my future death comes in the form of choking on kale if I continue to consume kale. I'm navigating probabilities rather than certainties, and my ability to even estimate the probabilities is deeply flawed.

[speakbigtruth]

Or how are the consequences determined?

[simaodecirene]

Consequencialism should not be taken seriusly. Deriving the morality of an action on its empirical consequences falls into Hume's Law. Clear _non sequitur_ .