![hedonic consequentialism hedonic consequentialism](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/QQnjwO3q41o/maxresdefault.jpg)
I agree that this is an important argument, and we could all stand to be a little bit more aware that people we disagree with are people with feelings. I think there are three things that people sometimes mean by "but what if everyone did that?" The first is simple empathy: if it hurts you to be shamed, then you should consider the possibility that it hurts other people to be shamed too, no differently from how you are hurt. I did not realize we are all Kantians now.
HEDONIC CONSEQUENTIALISM FREE
And when I express my consequentialist beliefs about free speech a surprising number of my consequentialist friends respond with "but what if your political opponents did that?" I appreciate Charles Murray refusing to speak at an event Milo Yiannopoulous is at because he is "a despicable asshole" and I wish more people would follow his example. I think it is fine to call someone a bigoted asshole if they are, in fact, saying bigoted asshole things. For instance, I support making fun of people who say sexist or racist things in public. I have some consequentialist beliefs about free speech.
![hedonic consequentialism hedonic consequentialism](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/srengthethics-140321032543-phpapp01/95/srength-ethics-6-638.jpg)
(I continue to find it weird that these are the Only Three Options For Decision-Making About Ethics, So Says Philosophy, but anyway.) So do most people I know. In spite of my sympathies for virtue ethics, I do think it is generally better to make decisions based on whether the outcomes are good as opposed to decisions based on whether they follow a particular set of rules or are the decisions a person with particular virtues would make. While it's allowed to care about whether things are better or worse (some deontologists I know call it their "axiology"), you can only care about that within the constraints of the rule system. For example, one might do only the actions that you'd will that everyone do, or actions that involve treating other people as ends rather than means, or actions that don't violate the rights of other beings, or actions that don't involve initiating aggression, or actions that are not sins according to the teachings of the Catholic Church. In deontology, one makes ethical decisions by choosing the actions that follow some particular rule. Of course, it's impossible to figure out all the consequences of your actions in advance, so many people follow particular sets of rules which they believe maximize utility overall this is sometimes called "rule consequentialism" or "rule utilitarianism."
![hedonic consequentialism hedonic consequentialism](https://image.slideserve.com/373365/consequentialism-l.jpg)
![hedonic consequentialism hedonic consequentialism](https://mrunal.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/e1p2-ethics-theory-VCR.png)
In consequentialism, one makes ethical decisions by choosing the actions that have the best consequences, whether that means maximizing your own happiness and flourishing (consequentialist ethical egoism), increasing pleasure and decreasing pain (hedonic utilitarianism), satisfying the most people's preferences (preference utilitarianism) or increasing the number of pre-defined Good Things in the world (objective list consequentialism). Many consequentialists of my acquaintance appear to suffer from a tragic case of deontologist envy.