User:Petra Sen/Petra Sen

On the article of Utility Monster, I will add the following corrections: I would add the following section on the history of The Utility Monster, explaining Nozick's approach to ethics:
 * 1) Add a link to the Wikipedia "Utilitarianism" page when it is mentioned
 * 2) Cite Frederick Kennard's quotes throughout the article, where citations are currently established as needed. This is found in the following sections, with number 2 and 3 following "citation needed":
 * 3) The first line in the opening section of the article
 * 4) The one line in "The thought experiment" between the first and second paragraphs
 * 5) The last line in the "The thought experiment"'s third paragraph.
 * 6) More background or history of the concept would be extremely beneficial, so readers can better grasp the subject and it's relevance to thought today because they understand from where the idea arose.

History

Robert Nozick, philosopher in twentieth century America, coined the term Utility Monster in response to Jeremy Bentham's philosophy of Utilitarianism. Nozick proposed that accepting the theory of Utilitarianism causes the necessary acceptance of the condition that some people would use this to justify exploitation of others. An individual (or specific group) would claim their entitlement to more "happy units" than they claim others deserve, and the others would consequently be left to receive less "happy units."

Nozick deems these exploiters 'Utility Monsters' (and for ease of understanding, they might also be thought of as Happiness Hogs). Nozick poses Utility Monsters justify their greediness with the notion that compared to others, they experience greater inequality or sadness in the world, and deserve more happy units to bridge this gap. People not part of the Utility Monster group (or not the Utility Monster individual themselves) are left with less happy units to be split among the members. Utility Monsters state that the others are happier in the world to begin with, so they would not need those extra happy units to which they lay claim anyway. [2]

Relevance

The reason this can come to be, and the reason the Utility Monster is a condition of Utilitarianism in effect, is because the philosophy necessarily begs the question of how to measure happiness [4]. A person can be in much grief, but there is no physical way to measure the lack of happiness they experience, and whether this is greater or less than a person who is enduring a different pain, like physical torture. Rephrased, this brings to light the question of which person is more deserving and which person is less deserving of happiness units based on life experiences. Individuals must take other's word regarding how much happiness they each possess, and the happiness they should therefore be able to lay claim. It is a common idea among people that hurt individuals deserve compensation for their pain. Yet Nozick's Utility Monster would take advantage of this reward process, by proclaiming their pain is the greatest and most deserving of reward.

Kuznicki argues the reverse is true. According to Kuznicki, this proposed justification negatively affects society, because people's demand for equal payment for life's pain creates these Utility Monsters. One such group he suggests comes in the form of people who seek political correctness. He states that these folks butcher other people's right to free speech, under the pretense that it causes their group (or their individual) pain. He states that it is unjustifiable that pain one causes another is greater than someone else's. He thus provides the example of censorship, where if one person finds a certain censorship offensive, while others do not, who's to say that the offended person's hurt is worthy of a law of censorship of that material to be created [4]? Specifically,

"If 'feelings of upset' are to be taken into account in shaping our laws, why do my feelings, and the feelings of other libertarians, always count for nothing?" [4].

Bibliography of corrections and additions: *there are not many reputable sources published on the topic, so I would dig deeper into the first two sources here (which are already referenced on the Wikipedia page, but minimally so), and add information from the last source about Nozick's approach.

[1] "Utilitarianism". Wikipedia. 2016-10-14.

[2] Kennard, Frederick (March 20, 2015). Thought Experiments: Popular Thought Experiments in Philosophy, Physics, Ethics, Computer Science & Mathematics (First ed.). AMF. p. 322. ISBN 9781329003422.

[3] "Nozick, Robert | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy". www.iep.utm.edu. Retrieved 2016-10-18.

[4] Kuznicki, Jason (November 16, 2009). "Attack of the Utility Monsters: The New Threats to Free Speech" (PDF). Cato Institute. Cato Institute. Retrieved October 15, 2016.