Comments on: Can Tess Help Us Solve “The Dilemma”? http://www.morallust.com/?p=99&utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=can-tess-help-us-solve-the-dilemma A blog about sexual ethics and the philosophy of sexuality Sun, 07 Apr 2013 03:32:36 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: neil http://www.morallust.com/?p=99#comment-31 neil Tue, 17 Jan 2012 21:35:07 +0000 http://www.morallust.com/?p=99#comment-31 A distinguished economist who is a expert in the application of economic principles to sexual questions writes: "Your question of whether or not to tell a spouse that they have been cuckolded is not difficult for an economist who would simply apply the principles of Pareto optimality: Can someone be made better off without making others worse off? The only one made better off in the situation is the teller since they clearly want to get the information off their chest. But in doing so they only make the couple worse off. In theory at least (one thing is certain, no one will thank him later). So, they shouldn't tell under that condition." A distinguished economist who is a expert in the application of economic principles to sexual questions writes: “Your question of whether or not to tell a spouse that they have been cuckolded is not difficult for an economist who would simply apply the principles of Pareto optimality: Can someone be made better off without making others worse off? The only one made better off in the situation is the teller since they clearly want to get the information off their chest. But in doing so they only make the couple worse off. In theory at least (one thing is certain, no one will thank him later). So, they shouldn’t tell under that condition.”

]]> By: Neil http://www.morallust.com/?p=99#comment-30 Neil Tue, 17 Jan 2012 06:06:15 +0000 http://www.morallust.com/?p=99#comment-30 I think that utilitarians want to look at all available information. So certainly a decision can be proven by time to have been utility-maximising. However, I think that inasmuch as it is a moral theory, meant to help us make the best decisions, it has to be committed to something like: you should do what is best given the information that is available to you at the time. You are deciding whether to shoot a man in Reno just to watch him die. Unbeknownst to you, he is a terrorist planning an attack on innocent civilians. I think it's hard for a utilitarian to praise you, exactly, if you pull the trigger. However, if you have an honest, reasonable belief that a given course of action will maximise happiness in time, then I think you have every right to claim vindication if time proves you right. I think that utilitarians want to look at all available information. So certainly a decision can be proven by time to have been utility-maximising. However, I think that inasmuch as it is a moral theory, meant to help us make the best decisions, it has to be committed to something like: you should do what is best given the information that is available to you at the time. You are deciding whether to shoot a man in Reno just to watch him die. Unbeknownst to you, he is a terrorist planning an attack on innocent civilians. I think it’s hard for a utilitarian to praise you, exactly, if you pull the trigger. However, if you have an honest, reasonable belief that a given course of action will maximise happiness in time, then I think you have every right to claim vindication if time proves you right.

]]> By: Justin http://www.morallust.com/?p=99#comment-29 Justin Mon, 16 Jan 2012 06:05:12 +0000 http://www.morallust.com/?p=99#comment-29 In favour of the student keeping his mouth shut, time passing tends to dull the pain of old sins. If you were to find out that your wife slept with someone else in the first (monogamous) year of your relationship, and that was ten years ago, and you have every reason to believe it's never happened since, the emotional trauma now would be vastly smaller than it would a mere month after the infidelity. Does utilitarianism admit post hoc justifications for decisions? If Caravaggia and Tiberius lived happily ever after, does that justify the student's silence? If one argues that the student was wrong at that time, does waiting it out change the moral calculus? In favour of the student keeping his mouth shut, time passing tends to dull the pain of old sins. If you were to find out that your wife slept with someone else in the first (monogamous) year of your relationship, and that was ten years ago, and you have every reason to believe it’s never happened since, the emotional trauma now would be vastly smaller than it would a mere month after the infidelity.

Does utilitarianism admit post hoc justifications for decisions? If Caravaggia and Tiberius lived happily ever after, does that justify the student’s silence? If one argues that the student was wrong at that time, does waiting it out change the moral calculus?

]]>