BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
METHOD:PUBLISH
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
PRODID:-//WordPress - MECv4.9.5//EN
X-WR-CALNAME:WordPress
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://soh.hku.hk/
BEGIN:VEVENT
UID:MEC-1aa057313c28fa4a40c5bc084b11d276@soh.hku.hk
DTSTART:20220922T080000Z
DTEND:20220922T094500Z
DTSTAMP:20220916T023900Z
CREATED:20220916
LAST-MODIFIED:20220916
SUMMARY:Department of Philosophy
DESCRIPTION:ONLINE JOINT SEMINAR
The University of Hong Kong
Lingnan University
National University of Singapore
Abelard Podgorski
National University of Singapore
“Utilitarianishm” and Complaints
Thursday
22 September 2022
4:00-5:45 pm
Zoom link:
https://hku.zoom.us/j/92448586439?pwd=amJPTmpReUdzYkZCbXFhUnFwcms3Zz09
Abstract:
Many people are attracted to standard consequentialist utilitarianism in spite of a host of familiar objections. I think this is not surprising given the pluralist, deontological, and virtue-ethical views it is typically pitted against. Compared to those views, it is simple, relatively tractable, grounded in an appealing idea about what matters most morally, and theoretically elegant. But I think its plausibility is exaggerated by the fact that people are looking so far into the distance for alternatives. In this talk, I consider a view which is much closer to utilitarianism – the view that we ought to minimize complaints derived from peoples’ welfare. This view, I’ll argue, is like standard utilitarianism in just the right ways – by being monistic about value, welfarist, and aggregative – to secure its most important advantages. But it also departs from utilitarianism in just the right ways to avoid a number of natural objections. In the end, I claim, there is simply very little to say in favor of utilitarianism over this view.
For inquiries:
Nathaniel Sharadin
sharadin@hku.hk
 
URL:https://soh.hku.hk/events/utilitarianishm-and-complaints/
ATTACH;FMTTYPE=image/jpeg:https://soh.hku.hk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Abelard-Podgorski-scaled.jpg
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR