Editing Robert Nozick (section)

===Thought experiments regarding utilitarianism===

Early sections of ''Anarchy, State, and Utopia'', akin to the introduction of ''A Theory of Justice'', see Nozick implicitly join Rawls's attempts to discredit [[utilitarianism]]. Nozick's case differs somewhat in that it mainly targets [[hedonism]] and relies on a variety of thought experiments, although both works draw from Kantian principles.

Most famously, Nozick introduced the [[experience machine]] in an attempt to show that [[ethical hedonism]] is not truly what individuals desire, nor what we ought to desire:

{{Blockquote
|text=There are also substantial puzzles when we ask what matters other than how people's experiences feel "from the inside." Suppose there were an experience machine that would give you any experience you desired. Superduper neuropsychologists could stimulate your brain so that you would think and feel you were writing a great novel, or making a friend, or reading an interesting book. All the time you would be floating in a tank, with electrodes attached to your brain. Should you plug into this machine for life, preprogramming your life's experiences?<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Nozick|first1=Robert|title=Anarchy, State, and Utopia|pages=42–43|year=1974|publisher=Basic Books}}</ref>
}}

Nozick claims that life in an experience machine would have no value, and provides several explanations as to why this might be, including (but not limited to): the want to do certain things, and not just have the experience of doing them; the want to actually become a certain sort of person; and that plugging into an experience machine limits us to a man-made reality.

Another thought experiment Nozick proposes is the [[utility monster]], designed to show that [[average utilitarianism]] could lead to a situation where the needs of the vast majority were sacrificed for one individual. In his exploration of deontological ethics and animal rights, Nozick coins the phrase "utilitarianism for animals, Kantianism for people", wherein the separateness of individual humans is acknowledged but the only moral metric assigned to animals is that of maximizing pleasure:

{{Blockquote
|text=[Utilitarianism for animals, Kantianism for people] says: (1) maximize the total happiness of all living beings; (2) place stringent side constraints on what one may do to human beings.<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Nozick|first1=Robert|title=Anarchy, State, and Utopia|page=39|year=1974|publisher=Basic Books}}</ref>
}}

Before introducing the utility monster, Nozick raises a hypothetical scenario where someone might, "by some strange causal connection", kill 10,000 unowned cows painlessly by snapping their fingers, asking whether it would be morally wrong to do so.<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Nozick|first1=Robert|title=Anarchy, State, and Utopia|page=36|year=1974|publisher=Basic Books}}</ref> On the calculus of pleasure that "utilitarianism for animals, Kantianism for people" uses, assuming the death of these cows could be used to provide pleasure for humans in some way, then the (painless) deaths of the cows would be morally permissible as it has no negative impact upon the utilitarian equation. 
 
Nozick later explicitly raises the example of utility monsters to "embarrass [utilitarian theory]": since humans benefit from the mass sacrifice and consumption of animals, and also possess the ability to kill them painlessly (i.e., without any negative effect on the utilitarian calculation of net pleasure), it is permissible to humans to maximize their consumption of meat so long as they derive pleasure from it. Nozick takes issue with this as it makes animals "too subordinate" to humans, counter to his view that animals ought to "count for something".<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Nozick|first1=Robert|title=Anarchy, State, and Utopia|pages=35–42|year=1974|publisher=Basic Books}}</ref>{{ref|vegetarian|a}}