How are you?
Technocracy, at least in its 21st century revival is fairly heterogeneous & anti-dogmatic. There is very much a paucity of writing on what one could call "technocratic ethics" probably as a result of its earlier proponents wishing to be "above" such concerns. I would, speaking mostly for myself, characterise it and its supporters as being ultimately prioritarian. That is that it uses many of the assumptions of utilitarianism about what is good while keeping in mind the need for social justice, it's utilitarianism with its eyes open if you'll allow some indulgent language . If you want it pared down to a single, pithy, phrase I think the wikipedia article on Prioritarianism does as good a job as any when it states: "the goodness of an outcome is a function of overall well-being across all individuals with extra weight given to worse-off individuals." That's my view of it anyway. No doubtthis will be (another) one of those issues where asking 10 technocrats will give 11 answers.
Hey there. I've just been recently reading up on Technocracy. My interest peaked after viewing standpoints you, NoXion and Cult of Reason take on the system, and I'd like to could ask a question. Is Technocracy utilitarian? As from the standpoint in which I read it, utilitarian policies would be more objective than majoritarian ones. Yet majoritarianism is more egalitarian than ultility, so I'm a tad bit confused on what both you and plain technocracy proport.
