The hedonic treadmill is as you well describe, but your characterization of utilitarianism is skewed similarly to how opponents’ characterizations of deontology include rigid and absurd adherence to rules even when a particular situation clearly calls for deviation. Many utilitarians, counter to how you represent them, seem at times over…
The hedonic treadmill is as you well describe, but your characterization of utilitarianism is skewed similarly to how opponents’ characterizations of deontology include rigid and absurd adherence to rules even when a particular situation clearly calls for deviation. Many utilitarians, counter to how you represent them, seem at times overly concerned with future people/consequences (climate change, AI misalignment, etc.) at the expense of current people and happiness.
I’m not a utilitarian or a deontologist or a pragmatist or anything else because I see the obvious strengths all these philosophies offer depending on circumstance. All are insightful, and the danger lies in dogmatically accepting or rejecting any one of them at the expense of all others. This of course leads to extremism, which is the one philosophy I see no strength in.
The hedonic treadmill is as you well describe, but your characterization of utilitarianism is skewed similarly to how opponents’ characterizations of deontology include rigid and absurd adherence to rules even when a particular situation clearly calls for deviation. Many utilitarians, counter to how you represent them, seem at times overly concerned with future people/consequences (climate change, AI misalignment, etc.) at the expense of current people and happiness.
I’m not a utilitarian or a deontologist or a pragmatist or anything else because I see the obvious strengths all these philosophies offer depending on circumstance. All are insightful, and the danger lies in dogmatically accepting or rejecting any one of them at the expense of all others. This of course leads to extremism, which is the one philosophy I see no strength in.