Utilitarians could respond to the "lynching is fun" example by rejecting their view and moving to another approach. Or they could
Utilitarians could respond to the "lynching is fun" example by rejecting their view and moving to another approach. Or they could
A utilitarian might say, "I want to modify my view. I now say that sadistic pleasures are intrinsically bad. Thus I can hold that the lynching is wrong -- since it brings sadistic pleasures to the lynch mob." This modification would get around the lynching example. But other objections may require further modifications.
A utilitarian also might take one of the other alternatives.
Utilitarians could respond to the "lynching is fun" example by rejecting their view and moving to another approach. Or they could
A utilitarian might say, "Permitting such lynchings would have bad long-range consequences -- and so wouldn't really maximize pleasure." But we can suitably adjust the imagined situation to take account of such consequences. Perhaps the politically opportune moment to start opposing such lynchings is a year after they lunch you. So it could maximize the total pleasure to lynch you now -- and then later to oppose future lynchings.
A utilitarian also might take one of the other alternatives.
Utilitarians could respond to the "lynching is fun" example by rejecting their view and moving to another approach. Or they could
A utilitarian might say, "I do desire that I be hanged in this case to promote the lynch mob's pleasure." But then we can find further objections. Utilitarians will find it difficult to keep biting the bullets.
A utilitarian also might take one of the other alternatives.
Utilitarians could respond to the "lynching is fun" example by rejecting their view and moving to another approach. Or they could
They have three choices.