Instigator / Pro
2
1510
rating
4
debates
75.0%
won
Topic
#2618

A Defense of Utilitarianism

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
3
Better sources
0
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
1
1

After 1 vote and with 5 points ahead, the winner is...

Undefeatable
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
7
1644
rating
64
debates
65.63%
won
Description

Utilitarianism is a moral system proposed by Jeremy Bentham. To quote him: "The most good for the most number should be the guilding principal of conduct".

I will hold the position that Utilitarianism is correct, and my opponent will hold that Utilitarianism is incorrect. Other moral systems will not be discussed in this debate.

It is adviced that my opponent has at least a basic understanding of Utilitarianism other then what's in the description before accepting the debate.

I look forward to a lively debate!!!

sorry couldnt get around to it, but Safalcon's vote looked pretty good

-->
@MisterChris

Ping

-->
@Safalcon7

Thank you for voting.

-->
@MisterChris

I'm hoping I still can, but consider this a ping

-->
@Safalcon7

There's no contest in voting, and that's unfortunate because your vote was a brilliant piece of work. It certainly deserves kudos. Well done!
The hour is short and I intend to vote. I hope I can get it done before the time closes. Again, bravo.

-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph
@Undefeatable

ping me tomorrow, I may be able to squeeze out a vote on this.

Vote bump

-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph

sure. I'll just clear out my affairs and look into it soon.

-->
@Safalcon7
@Sum1hugme

Want to vote?

vote bump

-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph

Sorry about the last round. I might need to work on my final round conclusions. I couldn’t think of anything new so I just did an overarching touch on ideas.

-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph

also, if Virtue Ethics' differentiation seems confusing (since I admitted you failed to show differentiation), the implication is that, it is more likely that the action itself is wrong, rather than the outcome is right or wrong

(Utilitarian would say the overall majority has the right to be given moral duty, while I am arguing for individual duty in a sense)

I can clarify this in R4 if you like.

-->
@Undefeatable

Thank you for a good debate this far. I tried the best I could to spell out what I personally follow, in the opening of the first round. (I didn't do it perfectly though, since you thought that I valued happiness as supreme), I will try to do better next time to spell out all of my beliefs.

And yes, it's acceptable. I didn't think of them being brought up in that way, but the way you brought them up is completely okay.

-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph

sorry if my argument seems confusing. Arguments I~VI are what I consider necessary to question and bring out the true core values of utilitarianism. Some versions of utilitarianism only value happiness (as Mill argues implicitly). Not all utilitarian would consider lives infinitely valuable (in fact, that's the first time I've seen a utilitarian argue that). Not all utilitarian stick with Mill's idea that higher goods are emotional and lower goods are senses.

Next time, it would help to specify all examples and ideas of what utilitarian acts you advocate for, as well as higher/lower goods. ("Seek pleasurable" gives illusion that you're arguing for happiness, which I structured I~VI for.)

Also I know you said other moral systems will not be discussed, but I'm pretty sure you meant for Pro side's support. For utilitarianism to work, as it says we want the best results, we must consider other ideals that are followed. I hope that's acceptable.

had to cut out 1000 words from my 3rd round argument to be under the 10,000 word limit. LOL.

-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph

If you miraculously make it to round three, I will give you with the fundamental flaw of P1 and P2 you’ve wanted. Look forward to it. ;)

-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph

If VI looks confusing, I struggled to word it correctly. I think the most clarified way to conclude the study would be to say "utilitarian ideas lead to ruthlessness, so ironically most people are usually less utilitarian"

-->
@Safalcon7

lol I see you take my username seriously...

-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph

I wanted to challenge "Everyone's pleasure (or good) counts equally" but I didn't have enough space... lol. Utilitarianism has so many flaws that 10k can't cover them all DX

-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph
@Undefeatable

I suspect it's gonna be a nail biting one. Good luck to both

-->
@Safalcon7
@Sum1hugme

Yes, this will be the challenge I have been waiting for. Win or loss, this debate is going to be my favorite I have had so far.

-->
@Sum1hugme

Yeah he's basically debating the UNDEFEATABLE!

Maybe this time ludolph will get the challenge he's been waiting for

Subscribing to this one.

-->
@Undefeatable

Nah, you can take it. I'm good without it.

-->
@Theweakeredge

hope you didn't want to take this. Well, you can request him any time.