I can see Trump being an awesome president

[Onyx]

Hmmm . . . wrong. That isn't what utilitarianism says. That's what ethical egoism says. Utilitarianism says "the greatest good for the greatest number."

False.

Utilitarianism has been consistently defined as the pursuit for maximum utility. While that phrase may relate to utilitarianism as a greater political philosophy, it is not the definition of utilitarianism.

I suggest you study the etymology of the word. The philosophy has been around for a very long time, and I suspect you have never read a book written by a utilitarian.

That doesn't rule out genocide if it benefits the greatest number. It doesn't rule out lynching if it benefits the greatest number.

Neither genocide nor malicious discriminate killings lead to maximum utility, therefore they are both immoral.

Human beings all seek to maximize utility in life. The Nazis failed, and their failure directly correlates with their evil actions.

 

[Onyx]

That would be altruism, and when did that become the only alternative to utilitarianism?

There is no alternative. Every human seeks out maximum utility. That is human nature.

Some deny their own selfishness, and I despise those type of people.

 

[bripat9643]

Hmmm . . . wrong. That isn't what utilitarianism says. That's what ethical egoism says. Utilitarianism says "the greatest good for the greatest number."

False.

Utilitarianism has been consistently defined as the pursuit for maximum utility. While that phrase may relate to utilitarianism as a greater political philosophy, it is not the definition of utilitarianism.

I suggest you study the etymology of the word. The philosophy has been around for a very long time, and I suspect you have never read a book written by a utilitarian.

That doesn't rule out genocide if it benefits the greatest number. It doesn't rule out lynching if it benefits the greatest number.

Neither genocide nor malicious discriminate killings lead to maximum utility, therefore they are both immoral.

Human beings all seek to maximize utility in life. The Nazis failed, and their failure directly correlates with their evil actions.

Utilitarianism has always meant the greatest good for the greatest number.

Google

u·til·i·tar·i·an·ism
yo͞oˌtiləˈterēəˌnizəm/
noun

1. the doctrine that actions are right if they are useful or for the benefit of a majority.
   • the doctrine that an action is right insofar as it promotes happiness, and that the greatest happiness of the greatest number should be the guiding principle of conduct.

Someone can make a good argument that genocide if perfectly consistent with the greatest good for the greatest number. That's what Hitler did. That's what Stalin did. That's what Pol Pot did.

Whether the Nazis failed or not doesn't prove your point. Many nations and rulers have failed.

Lynchings and executions have always been justified on utilitarian grounds. So has slavery. You can't justify virtually anything you want to justify.

 

[bripat9643]

That would be altruism, and when did that become the only alternative to utilitarianism?

There is no alternative. Every human seeks out maximum utility. That is human nature.

Some deny their own selfishness, and I despise those type of people.

Utilitarianism isn't about the individual. You are confusing ethical egoism or rational self interest with utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is supposedly the principle of a moral society. It's not applicable to the individual.

 

[Onyx]

Utilitarianism isn't about the individual. You are confusing ethical egoism or rational self interest with utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is supposedly the principle of a moral society. It's not applicable to the individual.

You should read John Stuart Mills, the most prominent figure of utilitarianism.

He defines it on an individual personal level and on a greater societal level. They pretty much settles it, since when arguing semantics, you should always trace the word back to its etymological root.

Oh, and avoid contemporary dictionary definitions in the future. The Oxford dictionary is the best, and I still would argue that half of their definitions are blatantly false.

 

[bripat9643]

Utilitarianism isn't about the individual. You are confusing ethical egoism or rational self interest with utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is supposedly the principle of a moral society. It's not applicable to the individual.

You should read John Stuart Mills, the most prominent figure of utilitarianism.

He defines it on an individual personal level and on a greater societal level. They pretty much settles it, since when arguing semantics, you should always trace the word back to its etymological root.

Oh, and avoid contemporary dictionary definitions in the future. The Oxford dictionary is the best, and I still would argue that half of their definitions are blatantly false.

I just quoted the definition to you.

 

[BULLDOG]

I say that because he has a long history of helping others in need. His (now adult) kids also know the importance and satifsication it brings to help others.
We recently saw that in another thread I started.

I also like how he respects the laws and our veterans. He stands behind, and supports, our police and military.

The guy knows high taxes, and over regulation, is killing us. While Hillary is talking about increasing both, Trump knows it's the last thing we need.

Trump also knows that Obamacare BS is a complete disaster I can only hope he'll come up something better.

Trump will never be president, but he might make a pretty good Mayor of Munchkin land

.

 

[Onyx]

I just quoted the definition to you.

And I just referenced John Stuart Mills, the guy who wrote a book called Utilitarianism.

Like I said, most contemporary dictionaries are incorrect. There are correct and incorrect ways to define words, and dictionaries often define them incorrectly. Of course, semantics are always debatable, and there are different schools of thought on the subject.