[Sceptic]

Death is the end of that specific lifetime's suffering, but not those surviving beyond that lifetime in the life of being human ancestry. So there is rational in err of thoughts...

Yes there is the suffering of the victim's family but there is also the loss of life on the rail line that the utilitarian has spared: the victim's family still have their life and the utilitarian has acted in accordance with utility.

[onemalehuman]

Yes there is the suffering of the victim's family but there is also the loss of life on the rail line that the utilitarian has spared: the victim's family still have their life and the utilitarian has acted in accordance with utility.

However, which utility? Separating real from reality or reality from real natural balances? Nature is the behavior of results after details are assembled. What is the process in which results function without comparing after the fact details where all things are not considered exponentially as a whole instant of compounding contracted results perpetually expanding details functioning within a specific balance between was and does continue?

That is something "now" has been throughout history of incomplete comparisons of social experimentation of classifying genders into performing character roles dictated within vernacular principals of symbolic replacements of understanding everything here in this moment naturally balanced universally as this instant is universally this moment changing within the physical law of action and reaction balancing the space time to conceptions and conceptually never staying the same details within common functions functioning the same way universally.

Utility is an existential linear analysis that separates and segregates classifications of divisions within the whole. But without using a center point of balance to keep from tipping the natural balance of everything functioning solely within the present unity isn't considered natural, but something super natural and that doesn't exist outside subjective interpretations ignoring the center balance of playing all sides of linear equating against the whole middle naturally balancing as always.

Radical thought and radical thinking is two separate categories like reciting is programmed and deciding is functions functioning without interpretation of other objectives that wish to prevent a common instinctive correlation where each lifetime comprehends sharing the same instinctive emotional reactions even with sole separation of being individual lifetimes of a common species of predatory natural behavior at the core of each conceived lifetime in specific ancestry of specific ancestors randomly conceived within the present moment always here and forever now universally applied.

Again, politics is about synthesizing exponentials into existential linear theories vs theology where the only things compared are composed vernacular hypotheticals and hypotheses real doesn't exist within one instant and time rules everything beyond the functioning present moment so the few that command grammar rule reality's humanities of every franchised role playing of notions in being society's children, not ancestral results adapting to this instant compounding changes taking place now as always?

This is how and why absolute power in controlling thought with existential linear equations prevents sole results from comprehending the self evident details within self containment to self maintaining molecular migration that works natural balance universally as we type our individual opinions from within our sole results of genetic continuations of ancestry always being male and fmeale lifetimes of specific combinations of compounding contracting lifetimes in a male female [population every generation now has in this moment never duplicating details twice as before or since each total sum result lived presently in that specific set of functions functioning here on this planet, or any where else in this universal moment throughout the universe being balanced now.

Remember matter consists of gaseous, liquid, and mineral combinations both as inorganic and organic configurations here now. Gaseous is spirituality, liquid is political, and minerals are materialisms symbolized beyond recognition because of honoring notions of reality ignoring the self containment of this moment balancing as always.

So instutionalism of church, state, and economic maybes life lives beyond this instant is where absolute power of choice becomes absolutely corrupted within theory and theology denying any body can understand how and why Eternity will forever be this now instant.

Thus creating the need for hope, faith, and charity vernacular tribalism is the only answer for human survivial as characters of humanity. Tyranny on parade regardless the greater good intentions of self loathing indiviudals wanting to feel superior than their own limited lifetimes.

Intellect and intelligence are mirrored reactions to instincts functioning the molecular masses of cellular functions within the balances of contracting forces and expanding details balancing to remain what is here now in this adapt or become extinct instant of compounding details functioning within the same genetic results of added ancestry each generation of specific details never duplicated twice randomly and natural balanced within the natures of everything living together here.

Choose to recite what is leading humanity to destroy the human existence or decide to stop honoring the ignoring of the self evident functions never outside now's present current events. This doesn't mean reality must end, just the governance of misdirection needs to stop leading the next generation to ignore the self evident that all lifetimes are equally created within how and why Eternity only physical exists within this universal balancing moment.

This covers the polarities of 7 virtues and 7 sins because of the seven divisions creating 6 halves and 8 corners to the sphere called Earth and each individual detail within Earth balancing univerally now.

Back to politics of suggestive possibilities nobody knows real, I do comprehend real beyond objective realities trying to govern perception that time changes real things.
Vernacular syllables painting the mental pictures of programmed thinking of people being society's children, not ancestry's total sum compounded results keeping the human population in the presence of this moment.

Think of what the dimensional differences are to the words life, alive, living are as a food chain of 6 halves. The forms of plant and animals, functioning within the behavioral instincts of predatory and prey, contining lifetimes as conceived male and female results of half the next generation remaining in this moment details are never duplicated functioning the same way all the time.

Kind of brings existentialism into being the tyrant of tyranny's divide and conquer philosophy in psychological class warfare of the vanitys in society's sibling rivalries where characters have rights and gender's don't matter.

That is insane thinking in governance of thought control to governamnts of time management of now's results next generation.
E=MC3. Einsteins e=mc2 is just rationed thinking to confuse the hell out of those following hope and faith reality is the only thing humans can know. Expanding details come from contracting results of compounding gaseous, liquid, and mineral combinations making both inorganic and organic results being exactly what now has become so far. This is the substance of all humanity's divided concepts to symbolized anything is possible as long as everyone believes time changes everything here now. This is the trickster of words humanity has as governance to character's rights taking liberties from ancestors of ancestry each generation here now.

Which comes back to Einstein's quote about insanity.

What kind of indiviudals would educate a population to believe that for over 400 generations now has had pass through this moment?

[nucklepunche]

I am a utilitarian pragmatist. It seems to me I live in society and I want my life to be good but I live with millions of other human beings in society. It makes sense we should all play by the same rules so I want everybody to play by the rules that allows me to live my life and be as prosperous in society as possible, I want the same for others. Sooner or later any philosophy is going to end up subjective though. Fuzzy logic is not appreciated in western philosophy but in the end I view it as inevitable once you reach a certain point. The hardest most rational philosophies always have catching points that cannot be explained in absolute concrete terms.

[Sceptic]

Fuzzy logic is not appreciated in western philosophy but in the end I view it as inevitable once you reach a certain point.

That's not the case, fuzzy logic has probability value between 0 and 1 and is utilised more so in contemporary philosophy then the classical tradition (since fuzzy logic itself is a modern construct).

Its merely a case of defining the centre ground, whatever it may be. This is easier said than done, of course, but who said political philosophy was an easy subject?

That is why I always rigidly set the boundaries for the positions I take, as an example, just war theory is the centre ground between realism and pacifism. It can be defined in terms of collateral damage and strict measures applied to minimise civilian death and all round pain and suffering. Of course even this is vague but I don't want to be blabbering on for ages to make my point.

[nucklepunche]

What I am simply saying is society defines my ideology as "centrist." I define myself as such for the sake of expediency not for the sake of principle. If I lived in a two party system where one party subscribed to Maoism and the other to Trotskyism it would not change my beliefs, then I would probably be defined as a conservative. I might identify myself as that for the sake of expediency. If I lived in 19th century America my ideals would be, and were considered progressive as opposed to centrist. It was the label given at the time and I would have identified as such for the sake of expediency. I am not out to split hairs. I have my beliefs and they are what they are but if somebody asks me how I define myself I will say "centrist" for expediency sake, not explain my every stance on every issue. I don't think this is what those who critique my "centrism" understand. It is an expedient label for me at least, not taking the center ground simply for the sake of doing so. I'm not running for office so what would I gain by that?

I stated I supported the following.

A mixed economy driven mostly by free enterprise with free trade and a relatively flexible labor market but with some government investment and social welfare provision funded via moderately progressive taxes.

Other than ignorant Tea Party members who define this as "socialism" most people in America and western societies define this as "centrism" or something similar to that label. I call myself that for expediency. I say, "I am a centrist" or "I consider myself to be a moderate" to sort of explain an approximation of where I stand in relation to the two dominant mainstream ideologies of America. If society defined that position as "fried cat turdism" or "dipshitism" that's what I'd call myself.