1. Utilitarianism is true. (non debatable)

The only thing you've done right in your post was count to 4 and not misspell words. That means you can go farther in how incorrect you are in the future, and will need to if you want to out-stupid the anons here.

Your choice of picture was the perfect mix of vapid, and self absorbed in one image. Communism is the low hanging fruit for this competition, but you highlighted the most stupid parts well by pairing it with a mistaken interpretation of a shitty ethical philosophy.

8/10 if it's your first effort.

this

communist societies end up more inequal than capitalistic ones. If economic and political power are in the same hands, equality goes out the window. Communists and lobbyist are two faces of the same coin.

>utilitarianism is true

>Utilitarianism is true

good luck in life kid

I would like to utilize that woman.

fuck off

>utilitarianism
>equating good with happiness
>happiness is the manifestation of biological urges
>following instinct is the highest good
>being a domestic animal is the highest good
t. Epicurus

>1. Utilitarianism is true. (non debatable)

Uh sorry sweetie, but that isn't the case.

1. no
2. wtf has utilitarianism to do with equality of outcome
3. bullshit, communism has only made everyone equally dirt poor and practically a slave with no rights or freedom apart the commie elite ofc who had all the conomic and political power
4. bullshit

>equality of outcome
Back 2 tumblr faggot

>Equality of outcome best corresponds to Utilitarianism
definitely wrong in the general sense. sure you can probably find a small country with a ton of land in which equality of outcome works simply because they have ample resources for everyone. try applying this to India or the United States and it will fail miserably and the system will collapse a short while after implementation

>1. Utilitarianism is true. (non debatable)
False.
>2. Equality of outcome best corresponds to Utilitarianism. (objectively)
False. It would be impossible to live in a world where actions are devoid of consequences (ideal equality of outcome). Therefore, happiness wouldn't be maxed out in such a world.
>3. Communism best accomplishes equality of outcome. (by definition)
Equality of outcome is not in any way related to communism.
>4. Therefore, everyone should advocate communism.
That's a valid, but false conclusion.

Literally every single one of these points is false

1. No
2. No
3. No
4. Yes

Negative utilitarianism is the true patrician take on ethics

(You)

If your definition of equality is everyone starving to death than yeah I'd say you're right with number 3

>1. Utilitarianism is true. (non debatable)
Wrong! Its metaethical assumptions are flawed at best as it assumes good is happiness when happiness is fleeting and good seemed to be contained in other things such as beauty, skill. Good is achieving somethings purpose not happiness.
>2. Equality of outcome best corresponds to Utilitarianism.
Wrong! All that is needed is the maximisation of happiness and the minimisation of suffering. This only requires a large majority to prosper well.

bunch of soyboys in this thread. op has it right

>communism claims to be "scientific"
>operates solely from methaphysical horseshit axioms
Checks out

even if 1 and 2 is true, 3 is just straight up false.

utilitarianism is not true, to many people individual sovereignty is more important

even if it was true equality of outcome is not necessarily the most utilitarian path. many people are happy living more simply and many people are very greedy. both of these groups would not be served by enforced equality of outcome.

also you still have to prove that the equal outcome created under communism is higher than the average outcome created under the free market, which is probably not true. it is more utilitarian to have inequality with the average wealth at 200 than to have equality at 100.

If everyone starves, everyone is equal!

>1. Utilitarianism is true. (non debatable)
>philosophy
>true

>utilitarianism is metaphysics
what the fuck kinda shit are you smoking faggot

Why is Utilitarianism true?

This. OP is a retard and probably a nigger.

1. my dick is huge (non debatable)
2. bitches love huge dick (objectively)
3. a personal harem is the best way to get my dick to them (by definition)
4. therefore, everyone should give me bitches

>non debatable

1. Utilitarianism is true. (non debatable)
Fuck off

>utilitarianism is true (non debatable)

>4. Therefore, everyone should advocate communism.
Not everyone advocates for communism so your argument is trivially incorrect, I don't even need to read your previous 3 deductions.

2 is only true if EVERYONE is risk averse.
If there is even one risk neutral party, or god forbid a risk loving party, then the optimal strategy is to give all your money to the most risky person and have him play the St. Petersburg paradox, as it generates infinite utility.
It's an actual example of the util monster.

Saying utilitarianism is non-debatable is metaphysics

This. Communism is still morally good from a consistently Kantian perspective though, being the only method for real freedom.