Sign up for free to listen for longer

Get unlimited radio, access to exclusive and original podcasts and non-stop music stations.

Control the way you listen to your favourite music, podcasts and radio.

Already have an account?

Log in

Sign up for free to listen for longer

Get unlimited radio, access to exclusive and original podcasts and non-stop music stations.

Control the way you listen to your favourite music, podcasts and radio.

Already have an account?

Log in

“Have We Got Morality Backwards? The Case Against Utilitarianism” with Bo Winegard

“Have We Got Morality Backwards? The Case Against Utilitarianism” with Bo Winegard

Uncomfortable Conversations
Sea. 1 Ep. 3971 hr, 48 min
17 Nov 25
Mark as played
Share

About the episode

What does it mean to do the right thing, and how do we know when we’re doing wrong? Is it ever okay to lie? To exact vengeance? To eat meat? To abort a foetus? To pamper your kids when that money could save a poor child's life overseas?  All of our most uncomfortable conversations stem, at their heart, from a conflict about what we ought to do. And the basis of our modern morality, in secular Western culture at least, is utilitarianism: the pursuit of the greatest good for the greatest number of people. Its most important living advocate, Peter Singer, has shaped how generations think about ethics, from animal rights to abortion, foreign aid, euthanasia, religion and more.  But what if your utilitarian assumptions are wrong? "Spectacularly and extravagantly wrong", in the words of today's guest? Bo Winegard is a social psychologist whose essay, Against Singerism, is an audacious critique of our basic moral framework. Josh and Bo unpack the appeal and limits of utilitarianism, the traps of moral absolutism, and what it means to lead a good life. If "the greatest good" isn't the ultimate moral goal, then... what is?