Philosophers should consider the fact that the greatest happiness principle can easily be made an excuse for a benevolent dictatorship. We should replace it by a more modest and more realistic principle - the principle that the fight against avoidable misery should be a recognized aim of public policy, while the increase of happiness should be left, in the main, to private initiative.
Interpretation
The quote suggests that prioritizing happiness in governance can lead to authoritarianism and emphasizes the importance of focusing on reducing suffering instead.
In this quote, Karl Popper critiques the idea that maximizing happiness should be the primary goal of public policy, warning that such a pursuit could justify oppressive regimes. Instead, he advocates for a more pragmatic approach where alleviating avoidable suffering is a key aim of policy, while the pursuit of personal happiness should largely be left to individuals, thereby allowing for freedom and personal initiative.
In practice
During a lecture on ethics, a professor might use this quote to illustrate the dangers of absolute power.
The growth of our knowledge is the result of a process closely resembling what Darwin called 'natural selection'; that is, the natural selection of hypotheses: our knowledge consists, at every moment, of those hypotheses which have shown their (comparative) fitness by surviving so far in their struggle for existence, a competitive struggle which eliminates those hypotheses which are unfit.
If you can't say it simply and clearly, keep quiet, and keep working on it till you can.
No particular theory may ever be regarded as absolutely certain.... No scientific theory is sacrosanct.
The belief in a political Utopia is especially dangerous. This is possibly connected with the fact that the search for a better world, like the investigation of our environment, is (if I am correct) one of the oldest and most important of all the instincts.
A rationalist is simply someone for whom it is more important to learn than to be proved right; someone who is willing to learn from others - not by simply taking over another's opinions, but by gladly allowing others to criticize his ideas and by gladly criticizing the ideas of others
Thus science must begin with myths, and with the criticism of myths; neither with the collection of observations, nor with the invention of experiments, but with the critical discussion of myths, and of magical techniques and practices.
The great objects which presented themselves [to the Constitutional Convention] ... formed a task more difficult than can be well conceived by those who were not concerned in the execution of it. Adding to these considerations the natural diversity of human opinions on all new and complicated subjects, it is impossible to consider the degree of concord which ultimately prevailed as less than a miracle.
You see, it's actually very good that a human activity is performed very close to death, because that's where life is. Life is, at its most valuable and most full, very close to the boundary of life.
Who will observe the observers?
Animals are my friends... and I don't eat my friends.
Tyranny is for the worst of treasons.
If ye despise the human race, and mortal arms, yet remember that there is a God who is mindful of right and wrong.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.