But the point that I want to stress here is that Sidgwick’s highly qualified account of utilitarianism strikes a very helpful and sober note – namely, his defense of it is along the lines of Roger Crisp’s defense of hedonism or Churchill’s defense of democracy, to the effect that it is the worst view except for all of the others.
Ma l’aspetto che voglio qui sottolineare è che l’utilitarismo altamente qualificato di Sidgwick ha un tocco sobrio e tenace – come dire che difende l’utilitarismo come Roger Crisp difende l’edonismo e Churchill difende la democrazia.