Hacker News Reader

Comment by consumer451 | Hacker News Reader

Isn't EA an offshoot of utilitarianism? Honest question. I always thought it was.

Consequentialism and to an extent Utilitarianism (since one is a subset of the other, it sometimes feels like philosophy is more concerned with naming things than explaining them but from the bit I've read those are the two biggest precursors).

AKA It's fine if I do locally horrible things if in aggregate I do more good than bad*

* by whatever metric of good I self select for - terms & conditions apply, much CO2 may be released.

It's funny, because as far as consequentialism, I feel like single-issue voters on all sides could use a bit more of that.

Of course, anything taken to extremes tends to get distorted.

FPTP results in a two party system where the sane response is often holding your nose and voting for the least worst candidate.

It's frustrating to vote for the person you disagree with least (by a little or a lot).

When I was younger, I was like that. I have a new take on that these days. Now, I find lacking the ability to "hold your nose" and do the best possible thing, in a less than ideal system, to be simply selfish. As in, I know there could be negative effects by me not voting, but I just can't sully myself. My virtue, above the greater good. Isn't that just plain selfishness?

I would not usually even say that out loud, as I don't want to be accusatory. However, I think that's just the facts at this point. Hence, my statement about a bit of consequentialism being good.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com