Which philosophers would agree with this image?

Which philosophers would agree with this image?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_monster
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

utilitarians aka retards

Hello faggot, it's me.

kys crossposting shitlord

Kant

Cuckcore, probably stoics

It doesn't even make sense, how does he know the thief is more happy than he is sad? Wouldn't it balance out if one lost something of equal value to what another gained?

Ayn Rand

Utilitarians

>My head got stolen in the 1990s
>I was pretty bummed about it
>But I think the UCL student was probably more happy to get it than I am sad to lose it
>So, whatever.

Is that his actual head? I forgot how that story went.

cucks

Nvm I looked it up.

> Scientists plan to analyse the great man's white matter to discover whether he was autistic.

Toppest of keks. You can't make this shit up.

This image is bullshit.

In this thread:

psueds cant into the operationalisation of abstracts like 'sadness' and 'happiness'

t. off to rub one out to traps.

Im now reading about this and you are correct it's exactly what wiki describes as utilitarianism
Refute its logic. Protip you cant because it's correct

You can't measure happiness

>psueds cant into the operationalisation of abstracts like 'sadness' and 'happiness'

Wtf I'm voting Bernie now!

Plz leave /pol/

>what are MRIs

Can you provide a source for MRI's accurately portraying happiness in people as to measure it?
Also, do people who are 'naturally happier' just matter more?

communists

Violent criminals are repeat offenders and also paranoid cravens, if anything, the neuroticism of the world increased. Except it didn't, because two men's short term emotions are largely irrelevant.

And let me add, no philosopher would agree with the image. The artist's brain is as deep as a bowl of soup. His inability to draw hands is a testament to his lack of discipline. Calling this a satire to reflect on the failure of modern thought would be giving the artist too much credit, rather, it's the embodiment. Cursed image, a retelling (or reenactment) of a biblical Babylon. This is mankind's degeneration. The mathematical equation for the fall of society. In thousands of years this image will be studied by bold scholars, unable to comprehend such sheer ignorance.

who's he?

this is Veeky Forums silly

>1800
>Say Dalton that atom theory of yours sounds might dumb, can you even see the things?

Communist and Socialist ones, OP. The have-nots took from the haves, and this is righteous because the haves stole from the have-nots. Wrongs have been righted.

Cancer.

I'm here to improve the show

...

That's actually pretty reasonable though. He'd been dead for quite a while, why should he care about losing his head? Letting people chop up his corpse was probably the smartest thing Bentham did. It at least proved his sincerity.

J.S. Mill, of the utilitarians. Specifically not Bentham since Act utilitarianism is quantitatively and impartially determined by all that 'moral calculus' or whatever. Mill allowed for shit to be varied according to situational factors. yes

The obvious objection to this would be that it's focusing on the speaker and isn't taking the lost happiness of all the now-dead people into account.

That being said, why don't utilitarians just kill unhappy people?

Do you live in america? I have never heard of a socialist or communist justifying random stealing of bikes. I would imagine there are more anarchist who would support it, but I think most would try to steal it back rather than just accept it. I am also pretty sure stealing was illegal in the USSR.
inb4 "stealing was legal in the USSR,
the state confiscated aristocratic property,
you know what I meant

>Specifically not Bentham since Act utilitarianism is quantitatively and impartially determined by all that 'moral calculus' or whatever. Mill allowed for shit to be varied according to situational factors.
Oh, so the utility monster doesn't work on Bentham?

Jeremy Bentham. I didn't know either, but I used a reverse image search to find out.

that comic is a refutation

On a real, judging solely from that picture it's hard to say whether utilitarianism would justify it. JS Mill's rule util. definitely wouldn't. Only the least sophisticated Benthamite util. probably would IMO.

Also, have you never watched Bicycle Theives? Not inherently an immoral act

Why do people think making somone bite the bullet is a good refutation of their theory?

I do not live in America, but just look at Bernie Sanders. He always goes on and on about the 1% or the 1/10th of 1%, talking about taxing the bejesus out of them and as I recall even taxing the middle class more. Cenk Uyger supports this and I'm sure Anna Kasparian (of Armenian descent, and the Armenian genocide was perpetrated by 'The Young Turks') is likewise for heavily taxing the upper class. It's all about taking from the rich and giving to the poor.

How about the Ukrainian farmers who had been producing so much food and getting rightfully wealthy from it? They suffered terribly under the Communists because they had seen it as theft somehow. Then look at Antifa, who seem to be thoroughly Socialist and many among their ranks would undoubtedly identify as Communists. They tore through Berkely when Milo went to speak, destroying all sorts of property and I heard that a Starbucks was also struck pretty bad. I wouldn't be surprised if things were stolen from there, and what was their ultimate rational? I've no doubt it was an assault on the concept of Capitalism, the idea of the have-nots taking from the haves.

So I stand by what I said; Socialists and Communists would stand by that comic. ESPECIALLY since it's a white male, the most hated combination of race and gender, even though it is white males who have provided the world with the greatest civilization ever seen in human history and the greatest technology ever seen in human history.

That's not what I said, I asked if it could possibly measure it accurately and empirically.
You must be unbelievably stupid.

Well that's kinda the utility monster ad absurdum where someone incredibly happy becomes tyrant.

But these things are silly, you could probably go for average individual happiness or something which means that killing unhappy people will make others unhappy and be counterproductive

Yep, all communists are latte sipping lesbians who want to oppress the poor white real estate owner who benevolently exploits them and takes their money away with the same move because they refuse to exercise their free right to starve to death in the woods.

See, I can make stupid connections as well.

dude, what are you talking about?

Not the guy you were responding to but your response is so asinine and following a personal logic understandable only to yourself. Craft whatever narratives you want loosely incorporating a fact around your idiocy.

1/10, got me to respond

Could you elaborate, please?

I want more of these

>At the centenary and sesquicentenary of the college, he was brought out to the College Committee meeting. He sat at one end of the table, the Provost at the other, and the minutes record 'Jeremiah Bentham, present but not voting'.

audibly chuckled

Surprisingly good production value

More of that cutie please?

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_monster

>claims to not be american
>every example he has of contemporary "socialism" is from usa
>So I stand by what I said; Socialists and Communists would stand by that comic. ESPECIALLY since it's a white male, the most hated combination of race and gender
Anyone who fucking mentions white male as something to be ashamed over have not earned the title communist, or their own life for that matter.
Also, you again seem to conflate destroying Starbucks (would someone please think of the Starbucks windows?) and taxing the 1% with stealing random bikes. It baffles me. Do you think the execution of Louis XVI was no different than murdering a stranger for their pocket money?

I like you

The man who stole the bike is not happy.

I doubt it. They probably sold it or some shit, happiness never crossing their mind.

ITT: What is preference utilitarianism (or really any kind other than hedonistic utilitarianism)?

The first post is the best post in the thread

...

lmao it's real

Even if utility monsters exist, I don't see why that's a problem for the utilitarian. Feeding suffering to the utility monster would be the incontrovertibly correct thing to do if we could be sure he or she were a utility monster.

Would you like to define what is needed to 'earn' the title of communist?

The dumb pussy faggot ones

because mass murder leads ==> unhappiness for others
thus net happiness has decreased

All attempt at socialism and communism has lead to suffering and widespread death in the 20th century.

They will respond by saying that true communism is stateless and thus it has never been attempted.

This is so retarded because it's not even true. Most bike thieves aren't poor people who want bikes, but professional thieves who steal multiple bikes a week to sell

This. Utilitarians are really some special kind of dumb.

Commies always try to use this logic, just use it back at them to show how retarded it is.

>Capitalism is bad because...
Capitalism has not been fully implemented anywhere yet, so whatever complaint you have is invalid.

...

any jewish philosopher

...

kek

no one, even utilitarians know junkies are miserable.

Moral disassociation and pragmatic failure too. Nothing can be gained, no abject lesson. Even a nihilist would shrug. An insulting query.

theres some schopenhauer quote about how the agony of the consumed animal is worse than the pleasure of the carnivore, or something. It's that, losing your bike is far more violating than selling a bike and owlturd is a shitty writer and also a cuck.

fpbp

This comics is just lazy, guys, if you're gonna do racist jokes put some cleverness in it

...

excellent post

>rational
>rationale
Bait

Not a lazy as the original.

If they get too clever people of color won't understand

spoiler : it was a negro who stole it,
and he already had a sizable collection of previously stolen bikes

>The obvious objection to this would be that it's focusing on the speaker and isn't taking the lost happiness of all the now-dead people into account.

Would making it the sadness of the now-dead people vs the happiness of the 5 times more populous US make it any less absurd? I don't

...

you are joking, Right?

Pretty good, I'd like to see the NAP and ancap ball involved

YEsssss, shadilayyyy

...

I’m surprised there’s no cuckold edit of this

Lol

It's your lucky day!

welcome to /rdt/ - reddit general

This whole site is Reddit friendo

The logic is just as bad on your side. It's not like capitalism has stopped suffering or widespread death. This is the time of year they have to start scraping people that froze to death off of the streets of a city with twice as many houses as people.

>communism kills a few peasants
>capitalism destroys the entire planet
>HURRR COMMUNISM IS BAD

Under communism, theft of the bike would not exist as there could be no such thing as "my bike" or "your bike" as the concept of property would cease to exist.

Personal property still exists. The means of production cannot be personally owned but thats it. Certainly there would be bikes for common use so there would be no need to steal one.

Even if they weren't for communal use... Marx wasn't against personal property, like you said, and it's not like Marx is the end all be all theorist and we can't change a single word or concept.

>The means of production cannot be personally owned but thats it
You are talking about socialism, not communism.

ps: One could argue that essentials, such as modes of transport ARE part of the means of production.