Philosophy question need help +++karma

i'm pretty sure that's in the movie wanted. besides that which i know isn't right, i can't help you. sorry.

I know it has to do with utilitarianism

Perry d'Angelis

maybe?

i dont think so, i want to say kant but i dont think its kant, could some one google it for me im on dial up and have been googleing it for 20 minutes but cant find anything. Karma++ please

Jeremy Bentham or maybe John Stewart Mill? Both were heavily vested in the notion of utilitarianism.

r u sure its like a famous quote and not something thats just turned into one because its been said so  much

john stuart mill, thank you very much sir karma to all

Got reading for a bit there, some very interesting stuff.

Definitely concerned with Utilitarian Morality.
I think Marx argued against some of the theory if you wanted an opposing stance

I believe, if my schooling serves me correctly that this is called utilitarianism the philosophy the judges everything in terms of its utility or usefulness, and heres the video from Wanted you were talking about





I think Dawkins talked about it in The God Delusion in the chapter about religion and morality

Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman have shown that framing can affect the outcome (ie. the choices one makes) of choice problems, to the extent that several of the classic axioms of rational choice do not hold. This is referred to as prospect theory[1]. Tversky and Kahneman (1981) demonstrated systematic reversals of preference when the same problem is presented in different ways, for example in the 'Asian disease' problem. Participants were asked to "imagine that the U.S. is preparing for the outbreak of an unusual Asian disease, which is expected to kill 600 people. Two alternative programs to combat the disease have been proposed. Assume the exact scientific estimate of the consequences of the programs are as follows." The first group of participants were presented with a choice between two programs:

    * Program A: "200 people will be saved"
    * Program B: "there is a one-third probability that 600 people will be saved, and a two-thirds probability that no people will be saved"

72 percent of participants preferred program A (the remainder, 28 percent, opting for program B). The second group of participants were presented with the choice between:

    * Program C: "400 people will die"
    * Program D: "there is a one-third probability that nobody will die, and a two-third probability that 600 people will die"

In this decision frame, 78 percent preferred program D, with the remaining 22 percent opting for program C. However, programs A and C, and programs B and D, are effectively identical in accordance with von-Neumann's expected utility hypothesis, in which the value of the outcome of an event is multiplied by the probability of its occurrence. A change in the decision frame between the two groups of participants produced a preference reversal, with the first group preferring program A/C and the second group preferring B/D. Edward Zelinsky has shown that framing effects can explain some observed behaviors of legislators.

No problem bra. Good luck with your work.

your all dumb, it was swordfish