This website serves as a window into my thoughts and the main source of information on Phenoutilism. The main pages are Theory and Opinions.

The “Theory” page is a ginormous collection of abstract information about Phenoutilism. Though it includes some examples of applications, it is largely theoretical and abstract.

The “Opinions” page is a collection of my own opinions on the matters of the world, that I form through a Phenoutilistic lens. Even if you don’t care about what I think or disagree with my opinions, I still think it is worth a read, as these opinions are examples of application of phenoutilism, stripped of much of the theory itself.

And here is a brief faux Q&A to get acquainted with my theory and how to apply it.

Q - What is Phenoutilism?

A - It is a doctrine that states that experiences and their utility exist most certainly. In a way, it is similar to experientialism, except it talks about what exists, and not what we can know.

Q - What is utility?

A - It is a feeling, like sight, touch, or smell, that helps us understand how desirable or undesirable the experience is. We always do whatever we think will bring us the highest utility.

Q - Are you a radical nihilist?

A - I don’t believe truth, morality, free will, and the self exist in the way these terms are usually used. Through Phenoutilistic lens, we can redefine these terms so that they mean what we actually mean.

Q - You claim that experiences exist most certainly. What does that mean?

A - Other things, whose existence we presuppose, like the material world, time, experiences of other beings, to name a few, might exist, but they don’t exist as certainly as experiences. It is possible that the material world does not exist, if we are brains in vats, or if life is a simulation, but experiences exist, and we can only assume that other things exist because our experiences seem to confirm them. In truth, just the present experience exists most certainly, but I have memories of experiences that happened 2 seconds, 5 minutes, hours, days, or years ago. Personally, I am assuming that the material world exists and that other people have experiences similar to my own. I assume that because it brings me high utility.

Q - Is Phenoutilism compatible with the belief in God?

A - Sure, it is even compatible with the existence of God or other higher authorities, not just belief in them. “God exists” is a descriptive claim. If that claim is accurate to your experiences for some reason, then why not believe in it? Just remember that God could be a part of the simulation himself (in fact, it would make sense of his “omni” properties). I, personally, am an atheist.

Q - If you don’t believe in morality or objective truth, how come you use these terms in your works?

A - Communication would be greatly stifled if I said “accurate to my experiences” instead of “true” every time. The use of objective terms, like “true”, “good”, “evil”, and many others, is omnipresent. Instead of omitting them from my lexicon, I redefined them so that their use cases persist.

Q - Can you give an example of how you redefine terms?

A - For example, I don’t believe that morality exists in the sense of there being objective good and evil. So I redefine it so that this word still makes sense in whatever context we use it today. For morality, it would be something like a set of prescriptive statements. Good is whatever we think brings us high utility, true is whatever is accurate to our experiences, to name a few others.

Q - What about altruistic acts and acts of self-sacrifice? People commit them, even though the expected utility seems to be low or negative.

A - The expected utility is not, in fact, negative or low. People derive utility from all manners of experience; some derive it from physical pleasure, some from spiritual well-being, and some from fame. In the cases of altruism and self-sacrifice, people could derive utility from knowing they acted morally (whatever they believe is moral) or fairly, or that they brought high utility to others. Empathy is our unique ability to derive utility from the utility of others and is usually the cause for acts that seem irrational at first.

Q - How can people “choose” whatever leads to the highest perceived utility if free will does not exist?

A - Choice is more like an automatic selection among the multiple options selected. Think about how a plant “chooses” to grow towards the sun. It could grow towards many other directions, but it grows towards a specific one anyway.

Q - Are political movements meaningless if your political opinion is just that?

A - Absolutely not. People derive utility from the state their country is in. If you are, say, fighting against slavery in Africa, and the knowledge of the freedom of slaves brings you high utility, then why not fight for it? Even if slavery is not an objective evil and the freedom of slaves is not an objective good.

Q - What’s the point of debates if everything is relative?

A - For descriptive debates, for example, whether NaOH and HCl would produce NaCl, we can always refer to what is accurate to our experiences, even if there is no truth. If someone believes the claim above is false, we can just create an experience that would be inaccurate to their statement, for example. For moral debates, we can do something similar, for example, if someone believes that murder is a very low utility experience and yet supports child sacrifice, we can demonstrate their hypocrisy. Even debates on whether welfare programs are evil, we can refer to preexisting prescriptive beliefs. But debates in general are largely pointless, unless you derive experience from mental exercise or being able to convince your opponent. If I became famous, I would debate so that people can listen and change their minds on certain issues, and their actions in turn could perhaps bring about a change that would, in its turn, bring me high utility experiences.

Q - All your materials are free. Why not put them behind a paywall and make money from the works?

A - Material gains simply do not bring me utility that is higher than knowing that my ideas spread. I make money from stocks anyway.