Tournament: Meadows | Round: 1 | Opponent: Immaculate Heart AS | Judge: Chris Bentley
the standard is maximizing life—four reasons.
- Actor Information—The resolution species a state. And, governments can only make decisions under generalities—this implies util.
Gooden 95 (Robert Gooden, philsopher at the Research School of the Social Sciences, 1995 Utilitarianism as Public Philosophy. P. 62-63)
Consider, first, the argument from necessity. .... adopting each alternative possible general rules.
2. Epistemology—Non-inferential epistemology is the only way to evaluate knowledge. Inferential views attempt to justify every step of the truth, which inevitably regresses into an arbitrary assertion—collapses to intuition anyway.
Macintyre 81(Alasdair MacIntyre, is a Scottish philosopher primarily known for his contribution to moral and political philosophy, After Virtue. Notre Dame University Press: 1981. Pg. 20)
Yet the most influential account ... on the basis of such a choice.
And, under non-inferential views certain principles are evident based on human intuition. These setup the basis for morality—solves regress.
Sinnot-Armstrong 07 (Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, is Chauncey Stillman Professor of Practical Ethics in the Department of Philosophy and the Kenan Institute for Ethics at Duke University Moral Skepticism, 2007)
Moral skeptics conclude that ... noninferential justification is admitted.
Thus, prefer maximizing life because happiness being good and pain being bad is a universal intuition.
Nagel 86(Thomas Nagel, University Professor; Professor of Law; Professor of Philosophy The View From Nowhere, 1986: 156-168)
I shall defend the unsurprising claim .... meaningless to deny that this is so.
Furthermore, even if one contests pain and happiness default to util because death prevents the ability to evaluate experiences and have intuitions.
Uyl and Rasmussen 81(Douglas Den Uyl and Douglas Rasmussen, profs. of philosophy at Bellarmine College and St. John’s University, “Reading Nozick”, p. 245)
In so far as one chooses, regardless of the choice, ... which makes valuation possible.
3. Act-Omission—No act omission distinction—paradoxical
Persson 4(Ingmar Persson, “Two Act-Omission Paradoxes” Source: Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, New Series, Vol. 104, 2004, p. 149-164 http://www.jstor.org/stable/4545410)
There are two ways in which the act-omission ... which killing is impermissible but letting be killed permissible
4. Policy-Making—democracy cannot adhere to a priori principles or side constraints because state action entails value tradeoffs for the advantage of society.
Woller 97(Gary Woller, BYU Professor, “An Overview by Gary Woller”, A Forum on the Role of Environmental Ethics, June 1997, pg. 10)
Moreover, virtually all public policies entail ... basis for public policy in a democracy.