Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Rasmus Fleischer (rasmusfleischer@tldr.nettime.org)'s status on Saturday, 01-Apr-2023 06:14:11 JST Rasmus Fleischer

   Does anybody remember which famous #economist that is known for a stupid though experiment about an "economy" in which there is only one single commodity which is named "utlity"?
   It's kind of ungooglable because of the sheer amount of stupid economists who do nothing else in life but filling up the internet with shitloads of the same stupid utilitarism. Therefore I'd appreciate any help to find a reference to this particular one ?

   • Embed this notice
     Rasmus Fleischer (rasmusfleischer@tldr.nettime.org)'s status on Sunday, 30-Apr-2023 16:08:34 JST Rasmus Fleischer

     in reply to

     • malte

     @malte Indeed! The metaphysics of "utility" is still at the bottom of economics, most visibly in calculations of stuff like "ecosystem services" or "quality-adjusted years of living". It's really Bentham all over.

   • Embed this notice
     malte (malte@radikal.social)'s status on Sunday, 30-Apr-2023 16:08:35 JST malte

     in reply to

     @rasmusfleischer Isn't this the founding principle of utility promoted by Bentham, Stuart Mill and the likes? I don't know of a thought experiment, I just thought this is how they thought in general, that all values can be reduced to "utility".

   • Embed this notice
     malte (malte@radikal.social)'s status on Monday, 01-May-2023 15:40:11 JST malte

     in reply to

     @rasmusfleischer In the economic paradigm, we cannot appreciate or "give importance" to a butterfly that for us is simply fascinating or a source of wonder, unless those experiences are translated (flattened) into a universal equivalent, ie. make beauty or wonder "valuable", instead of treating them as their own kind of values. And it's an echo of how we don't allow people to just exist as they are, without having to contribute or be useful.

   • Embed this notice
     malte (malte@radikal.social)'s status on Monday, 01-May-2023 15:40:13 JST malte

     in reply to

     @rasmusfleischer Or with your example, how to measure the value of a threatened species that do very little "ecosystem services"? Many of the vulnerable insects in our region honestly do not really have any "utility". People always mention pollination, but the evidence doesn't hold up for many of them and it all seems forced. It's because the only value modern humans can imagine is utility. It's almost as if the butterfly didn't "work" for us, it doesn't have a reason to exist.

     Rasmus Fleischer repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     malte (malte@radikal.social)'s status on Monday, 01-May-2023 15:40:14 JST malte

     in reply to

     @rasmusfleischer It's the founding gesture of economic "science", you could say. If you want to turn the complexity of the human world into a great calculation, you need a universal equivalent to flatten everything with. Utilitarianism / economics = value as proportions (value as in "how much"). That's how they lose the moral dimension of values (values as moral importance, like beauty, integrity, compassion, strength, care or whatever your culture values).