Retributivism as opposed to utilitarianism seems much more "tribal" to me.
Retributivism simplified can be eye for an eye for example - although these days it's more civilized thank fuck. Especially when it has more utility in it! (which is a mix of retributivism and utilitarianism which is what we have at the moment in most societies at least I reckon).
Utilitarianism means that what's moral is what has utility, what is good, for the future. Nothing wrong with that definition, the ideal is fine. I mean what's the point in punishing without utility? i.e: What's the point in retribution when no good comes for it? What good is it on occasions when it makes things worse rather than better? It's only moral when it has utility in my view.
So yes, I'm a utilitarian, because I can't think of morality in any other terms other than utility - there's no point in a justice system if it makes things worse than better, if it doesn't have utility. Utility is the way otherwise it's a self-defeating justice system by definition! (the way I see it at least).
The way I see it, retribution is fine, on occasions when it has utility. When it doesn't however then it's no good in my view - this is why I think of myself as a utilitarian.
As I said before, the 'greater good' and utilitarianism are different things. I am a utilitarian who doesn't believe in the 'greater good'. I don't believe in killing a few in order to save many. I just believe utility is moral.
EvF
Retributivism simplified can be eye for an eye for example - although these days it's more civilized thank fuck. Especially when it has more utility in it! (which is a mix of retributivism and utilitarianism which is what we have at the moment in most societies at least I reckon).
Utilitarianism means that what's moral is what has utility, what is good, for the future. Nothing wrong with that definition, the ideal is fine. I mean what's the point in punishing without utility? i.e: What's the point in retribution when no good comes for it? What good is it on occasions when it makes things worse rather than better? It's only moral when it has utility in my view.
So yes, I'm a utilitarian, because I can't think of morality in any other terms other than utility - there's no point in a justice system if it makes things worse than better, if it doesn't have utility. Utility is the way otherwise it's a self-defeating justice system by definition! (the way I see it at least).
The way I see it, retribution is fine, on occasions when it has utility. When it doesn't however then it's no good in my view - this is why I think of myself as a utilitarian.
As I said before, the 'greater good' and utilitarianism are different things. I am a utilitarian who doesn't believe in the 'greater good'. I don't believe in killing a few in order to save many. I just believe utility is moral.
EvF
