#Hedonic consequentialism movie

Poke the box, don’t be afraid but don’t change things too much unless you have a vision that is total enough.According to hedonistic act utilitarianism, an act is morally right if and only if, and because, it produces at least as much pleasure minus pain as any alternative act available to the agent. Therefore, what I would argue for is active deontology in most cases. When it becomes total enough, change is biggest tool, the best ally and the smartest aide. Change is dangerous, change is intimidating but sometimes change is important. Except when you know there needs to be change. It tells you that the rules exist for a reason and we would do well to follow them. So maybe Thanos (and other consequentialism siders) should be more careful before they decide what is best for the universe. The universe in all it’s vastness is a weird place with a more diverse set of condition than can fit into our (I would argue Thanos’) intellect. Thanos would need to prove that the idea was plausible and worked on planets that are almost inconceivable to our imagination (maybe to his as well). Measuring such a parameter on a universal scale would be tough. It would be a good parameter if it could be absolutely measured. This is where we start going deep, is conflict bad in any and all circumstances? Where do you draw the line? Some would argue that the degree of totality of the vision being implemented should be the deciding factor. Whatever the consequence, conflict would be inevitable. Some would consider it their duty to stop such actions (The Deontologicals), some others on the consequentialism side would consider their versions of consequences better and leap to prevent their own change making process from being stalled. Question is if anyone capable of wielding power, tries to take it upon them to ponder consequences and take action, what world would we be in? There would be retaliation, definitely. In Winter Soldier, it was shield on the consequentialism side that cap was dealing with (super carriers trying to eliminate threats before they happen, remember?) Dilemma

In the Captain America Civil War, they had our beloved Iron Man on the consequentialism side and cap on the deontological side. On to the real deal, the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) has grappled with this dilemma before. Maybe that’s why they released Deadpool 2 so soon afterwards to lighten things up (it was fantastic BTW, but I digress). Cudos writers, you’ve managed to depress an entire generation. This character was surprisingly relatable, which speaks a ton about the level of writing that has gone into this film.

Having experienced his own world fall apart and become devoid of life, he has set out to make sure no other world ends up in the same predicament. So this guy basically turns up, considering it to be his duty to restore the balance between the resources present in the universe and the amount of life it carries. In moral philosophy, deontological ethics or deontology (from Greek δέον, deon, “obligation, duty”) is the normative ethical position that judges the morality of an action based on rules. Here the phrase “overall consequences” of an action means everything the action brings about, including the action itself. Utilitarian ConsequentialismĬonsequentialism is the view that morality is all about producing the right kinds of overall consequences.

Let’s get started with the literal definitions before we go deep.

#Hedonic consequentialism movie

This debate was sparked in my head after watching the following video on a theory about how the Avenger 4 movie should end. Continue if you don’t care about being spoiled and/or are more interested in the philosophy of it. So please turn away and come back once you are done watching. Utilitarian Consequentialism V/S Deontologyįirst things first, this article may be a spoiler to people who haven’t yet watched Avengers: Infinity War.