the “utility” of “utilitarianism” might need more complexity than the “utility” of economics
My rough impression is that “utilitarianism” is generally taken to mean either hedonistic or preference utilitarianism, but nothing else, and that we should be saying “consequentialism”.
CEV might help here, but I do need to think about it more.
I think the “big computation” perspective in The Meaning of Right is sufficient.
Or if you’re just looking for a term to use instead of “utility” or “happiness”, how about “goodness” or “the good”? (Edit: “value”, as steven suggests, is better.)
My rough impression is that “utilitarianism” is generally taken to mean either hedonistic or preference utilitarianism, but nothing else, and that we should be saying “consequentialism”.
My impression is that it doesn’t need to be pleasure or preference satisfaction; it can be anything that could be seen as “quality of life” or having one’s true “interests” satisfied.
Or if you’re just looking for a term to replace “utility”, how about “goodness” or “the good”?
My rough impression is that “utilitarianism” is generally taken to mean either hedonistic or preference utilitarianism, but nothing else, and that we should be saying “consequentialism”.
I think the “big computation” perspective in The Meaning of Right is sufficient.
Or if you’re just looking for a term to use instead of “utility” or “happiness”, how about “goodness” or “the good”? (Edit: “value”, as steven suggests, is better.)
My impression is that it doesn’t need to be pleasure or preference satisfaction; it can be anything that could be seen as “quality of life” or having one’s true “interests” satisfied.
Or “value”.