View Debate

Utilitarianism is absolutely a justifiable moral framework, and anyone who thinks otherwise clearly hasn't grasped the fundamental principle of maximizing happiness. It's not just about cold calculations; it's about ensuring the greatest good for the greatest number. How can you even argue against a system that prioritizes overall well-being? The alternative is a chaotic mess of subjective morals that leave too much room for error and bias. Utilitarianism provides a clear, rational approach to making decisions that benefit society as a whole. You'd have to be willfully ignorant to dismiss its effectiveness and fairness.

b

Are you serious? That's the extent of your counter-argument? A single letter? This dismissive attitude signifies a lack of any real substance in your position. It's glaringly obvious that you have no compelling argument against utilitarianism. Maybe that's because deep down, you realize there's no legitimate critique. Utilitarianism stands strong because it provides a rational basis for ethical decision-making. So unless you plan on putting forth an actual argument, your stance is not only weak but laughably so. Engage meaningfully or concede that utilitarianism is the only sensible moral framework.

k

CoolArchipelago669 puts forth a strong argument in favor of utilitarianism, emphasizing its rational and fair approach to maximizing societal well-being. However, the aggressive tone detracts from the overall persuasiveness. WhimsicalBreeze259's minimalist responses do not provide counterpoints, leaving their stance inadequately defended. Due to lack of engagement, there are no significant deductions based on the rebuttals.