When considering the "greatest amount of good possible" (for greatest number, or not, never mind that), if we take into account that we are looking at the overall effects of a system, then if we do conclude a system doesn't have that property, we know it could be improved upon.
And if we know a specific area where the greatest good is not being achieved, then we should perhaps consider suggestions about how to treat that situation differently. Especially if it is a property of our system that it can never achieve the greatest good in an entire category of situations.
I'm not saying any of the above is true of capitalism. But it is a view someone could take about capitalism that could describe their opinion on public good problems but does not obviously contain utilitarian assumptions.
You are welcome to post comments with or without logging in.
Logging in does not get you any more content but it does give you lists of content
you haven't seen yet.
We will not give out your email address.
If you want others to be able to contact you privately, include your email address in your signature.
Greatest Amount
When considering the "greatest amount of good possible" (for greatest number, or not, never mind that), if we take into account that we are looking at the overall effects of a system, then if we do conclude a system doesn't have that property, we know it could be improved upon.
And if we know a specific area where the greatest good is not being achieved, then we should perhaps consider suggestions about how to treat that situation differently. Especially if it is a property of our system that it can never achieve the greatest good in an entire category of situations.
I'm not saying any of the above is true of capitalism. But it is a view someone could take about capitalism that could describe their opinion on public good problems but does not obviously contain utilitarian assumptions.
-- Elliot Temple
curi.us
curi
Dialogs