Zoroastrianism vs Utilitarianism

The reason why utilitarianism does not work is indeed because utility can not be measured. So alternatives can not be empirically compared. Utilitarianism is also weakened by social psychology. People tend NOT to choose utility when given the choice between alternatives. Instead they tend to do as Zarathushtra predicted: They choose according to who they see themselves as, rather than according to maximum utility. The movie "matrix" showed this with maximal effect.
Ushta
Alexander

2011/7/26 Daniel Samani

Dear Alexander,

It start to sound more like utilitarianism, with the fine but yet important distinciton that it's asha and not utility that's being summed up. How can one count or measure ether one? Asha as explained here is alteast more honest - in that it agree that it's our desires that drives what we consider asha (and therefore point to causality of subjects). Could you please clearify the term superstition - as in delusional druj perhaps or/and lack of irrelevant metafysics?

I am aware that with few reference points the closest that come to mind are utilitariansm. I must admit that I'm not a big fan of that line of tought. To me it's an immature way to cope for lack of objektive absolutism in an nihilistic reality. To calculate course of action is not intressting to my mind. To my mind when one develop asha one can't choose durj - character is destiny as Sigmund Freud put it.

Zoroastrism to my mind is character based - and does therefore not think there is a free will as widely held in the west.

Ushta
Daniel


2011/7/25 Alexander Bard

If I blow you up with a gun, it is asha that the gun works.

However, the consequences of me blowing you up, the fact that I lose a friend who I will dearly miss, is also asha.
Asha USED is of course always the sum of all possible ashas.
Zarathushtra's point being to construct a concept ENTIRELY FREE FROM SUPERSTITION. It is the world of superstition which is ultimately the world of druj. Parvuiz is right: Asha is the laws of physics in their widest possible monist sense.
Ushta
Alexander

2011/7/25 Daniel Samani

Dear Alexander,

So with historical facts you mean that aggression leads to blowback if one look at history? And that liberalism have worked in the past ;) Could you make it more clear in what way these examples work - do you mean data for reference? How is weapons and ammuniton somthing that works? You mean that in the right time and situation, one can use weapons to do somthing constructive?

Ushta,
Daniel