Negative consequentialism, suffering focused ethics, are quite ethical. Being dedicated to the unmaking of Israel, despite it being currently ruled by far right dickheads who are up to no good, isn’t morally defensible bc it cannot be done except through killing millions of Israelis, and those activists were NOT two state solution people. They were not pro peace people. They were pro-war people. Which reminds me of something else Kyle lied about: Christopher Hitchens. He deliberately clipped out the rest of this talk where Hitch argues that Israel already exists and ppl need to accept it

Consequentialism: the outcome is worse in the scenario where he doesn’t get caught because the money has no chance to be returned. If the money is returned, the outcome is less bad, so it’s less immoral. Deontology: in both scenarios, the man intended to steal. He did steal. It doesn’t matter if they are caught if the primary focus is the intention of the thief. Both are equally immoral.

Im not saying a story pushing a deontological narrative cant have characters bend their morality a little bit to avoid ruin But if we're gonna argue for some consequentialism when it hurt the Empire, then arent we just begging for a morally complex narrative?

That's simply an appeal to consequentialism without objective justification for it. The argument here is based in virtue and what is logically necessitated for an agent to act rationally as an agent to achieve goals.

It is a logical and prudential necessity, not an immediately practical one. The argument is not based in consequentialism, but in virtue ethics. There are elements of deontology and consequentialism, but virtue is the core of the argument here. The virtue to act consistently.

U can't enter into things in life and keep complaining, some people really should know about consequentialism

Consequentialism is an existential threat to humanity.

Consequentialism احب احكم على الفعل بناء على النتيجة ، النتيجة غير اخلاقية فأفضل التشجيع على تجنب الفعل، الفلسفة تميل للنظر على الشيء كتعريف او ال core مالته وهذا الشي الي يخليني ما انخرط بيها واميل لعلم الاجتماع الي يناول التداعيات للافعال

The Gender Industry is all bullshit and quackery. In the end, your fraudulent positivist Scientism and anecdotal consequentialism are irrelevant and will fade away in the face of a much stronger epistemology: the innate human intuition of the immutable and binary nature of sex.

I'd say it is a weaker version of: "Are deontology and consequentialism at odds?" They fight each other, but then you see them both as approximations of the true underlying thing, of what human values or proper beliefs look like, only distinct by virtue of categorization.

There is only one extremely unpopular ethical framework that I can think of that would consider circumcision ethical to conduct on little boys. Consequentialism. Every other ethical framework I can think of would prohibit even the recommendation of it, or allowing parents to decide. So it's very interesting you say you are weighing it. You aren't. Or else you would find it unethical to even leave up to the parents. This is why I don't trust your claim that a true trial of the vaccine schedule is "unethical". You're just a parrot for authority.

You don't understand libertarian theory in its very basics and have no principled concept of ethics, else your only two arguments wouldn't be consequentialism and fucking Somalia.

Epistemically & empircally, consequentialism is the supreme ethical framework. But on the basis that all utility is foundationally aesthetics, it's not a great motivator. Good for justifying actions to others, but not to yourself. Good for external discourse, but not internal.

If your principles and standards don't yield results. They should be discarded with no hesitation. Principle means nothing, practical results means everything. The only correct principle is Consequentialism; decisions made based on what the real world consequences will be.

consequentialism is the philosophy of achieving a goal no matter the cost. i like peace and quiet and abhor misery. it's proven that giving money away to africa is making africa poorer. deport all nigguhs, then carpet bomb the whole place, the result will be a better world.

we're waiting on the take about non-consequentialism sir

Oh my fucking god you are 5th guy making the same point, that's not what I wanted to talk about Can you guys talk about deontology and consequentialism for once dawg

So it turns out, at scale, in a society, that Sunday School deontology has better consequences than consequentialism does. 🔚

5p Back on the road listening to my next course lecture, “Intro to Philosophy: Consequentialism.”

That’s basically consequentialism vs deontology I see it as materialism vs idealism