Okay? So? A utilitarian having an easy answer doesn't actually mean there's 'structural favoritism.' First of all, utilitarians always have an easy answer to most thought experiments that don't address the prediction problem. The value in a thought experiment isn't in the ease of your answer. That's just stupid. The value in the thought experiment is stepping in and evaluating a stance, philosophy, belief, or lack thereof, and in getting one step towards applying and comparing them.
If you think the idea of a thought experiment is to score points by answering quickly and feeling smug, then I think you've missed the point dreadfully.
Half the interest in a given thought experiment is changing or adding nuance and seeing how that changes answers! Your position just feels angry, and not for any good reason, but because of a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of a thought experiment and how you should navigate them, combined with feeling outrage preferentially because the internet just does that.
All versions of the trolley problem are rooted in utilitarian ethics and inherit the flaws of that philosophy.
What? The point is to demonstrate different approaches. Yes a utilitarian will answer a predictable way. You can answer a different way. That's fine. That's the point. There's no right answer, it's a thought experiment.
Tradition, culture, etc make Celsius a useful tool. Human perception if temperatures is also not well correlated to Kelvin, where a change in 1 K is less than 0.5%, but to a person it certainly feels more substantial. By relating the scale we use daily to freezing and boiling of water, you at least capture both an okay human sensitivity, and important temperatures to us as humans.
Fahrenheit arguably goes a step further, defining a much narrower range for humans specifically, with some landmarks for water.
No system is objectively better, it's all convention and arbitrary. We could define an absolute temperature scale which puts human temperatures at 1 blorp, 0 as absolute 0. Clearly the resolution is pretty low, you'd have to define the weather with decimals. Oh well, that's fine. Annoying maybe, but valid.
Celsius is literally Kelvin + 273.15. They measure the same thing.
Fahrenheit is as Celsius is to rankine, which is also a measure of absolute temperature.
I'm not quite clear on where this is confusing you, Celsius is improper in many non relative equations yes but that's due to the math not a fundamental difference in what is being measured.
Because it's a massive waste of money for little to no benefit, and barely actually comes up because unit conversion is trivial and is done constantly regardless of overall unit system.
Armchair unit system fanatics make it out to be such a bigger deal than it is. Whether im working in metric or standard I'm doing several to several dozen dimensional analyses anyway, normally with industry specific units. Which again, exist in both standard and si.
Celsius and Kelvin are identical, just shifted scales.
Fahrenheit has an equivalent which is rankine. It's not that one is evidence based over the other, one is just absolute temperature and one shifted to be useful, essentially.
Oppenheimer, the bio pic about the scientist who rejected their own creation and associated happily with communists, and showed the actions of various people to specifically target someone for that? That non woke Oppenheimer?
It's a good translation in some cases but the nuance and connotations in this case means you should be using culture. Lifestyle in English generally refers more to choices you make, rather than something you are a part of, if that helps.
Here's the thing, our tissues are made of plastic. You can't really escape plastics as people understand them generally. Collagen is a polymer, fundamentally no different chemically than any other common plastic. Plastics are incredible materials, that's why we use them, it's why they were selected for evolutionarily; the problem is more complex than whether something is a plastic or not, and so "plastic free plastic" is an admittedly absurd term for biodegradable plastic not derived from coal or oil which has less environmental impact.
Oh alright. So completely fine then, from the sounds of it. That being the case im realizing a lot of people don't actually understand consent or why bestiality is bad.
Well if you want to manufacture outrage and put zero further thought into your philosophies and convictions that is certainly one of the first takes you might stumble across.
I mean, you're complaining about bestiality in a game and then don't care about consent? A strange take to be sure.
Was it a bear sex scene in that a player character has sex with a non sophont bear, or was it a bear sex scene where a player character has sex with a sophont druid in the shape of a bear. These are so incredibly different things that it needs to be stated before I can form an opinion.
Okay? So? A utilitarian having an easy answer doesn't actually mean there's 'structural favoritism.' First of all, utilitarians always have an easy answer to most thought experiments that don't address the prediction problem. The value in a thought experiment isn't in the ease of your answer. That's just stupid. The value in the thought experiment is stepping in and evaluating a stance, philosophy, belief, or lack thereof, and in getting one step towards applying and comparing them.
If you think the idea of a thought experiment is to score points by answering quickly and feeling smug, then I think you've missed the point dreadfully.
Half the interest in a given thought experiment is changing or adding nuance and seeing how that changes answers! Your position just feels angry, and not for any good reason, but because of a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of a thought experiment and how you should navigate them, combined with feeling outrage preferentially because the internet just does that.