Mill and Sidgwick both argued that utilitarian calculation must extend to all foreseeable consequences, making epistemic difficulty a reason for better prediction, not truncated scope.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Epistemic difficulty(as used in epistemology (the study of knowledge)): A situation where it's genuinely hard to know or find out information about something—like when the facts are unclear or hard to discover.
Foreseeable consequences(in determining moral responsibility): The outcomes or results of an action that you can reasonably predict or expect to happen.
Mill(as the subject being discussed): John Stuart Mill was a 19th-century British philosopher who wrote influential ideas about liberty, happiness, and what makes a good life.
Sidgwick: Henry Sidgwick (1838-1900) was a British philosopher who made important contributions to ethics, particularly by arguing that morality should be based on reason and impartial concern for everyone's well-being rather than just following traditions or religious rules. He is famous for developing "utilitarianism," the idea that the right action is the one that produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. His work remains influential in moral philosophy and practical ethics today because he thoughtfully addressed how we should balance our own interests with our obligations to others.

Based on where you are in your exploration