Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Do you really want to delete this prezi?
Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Transcript of Preference Utilitarianism
What is preference utilitarianism?
Who involve in it?
Strength and weakness
What is Preference Utilitarianism?
It is one of the most popular forms of utilitarianism.
define a morally right action as that which produces the most favorable consequences for the people involved.
asking whether it fits in with what people would rationally prefer.
Its suggest the right thing to do is the option which maximizes the chance of everyone's preference will be satisfied.
You should do what is in the best interests of the greatest number, rather than calculating pleasure against pain.
Peter Singer (1946-) is an Australian philosopher
Peter Singer also defends Preference Utilitarianism and suggests that we should take the viewpoint of an impartial spectator combined with a broadly utilitarian approach.
in acting morally, we should take account of all the people affected by our actions. These have to be weighed and balanced and then we must choose the action which gives the best possible consequences for those affected.
Differences between Singer's idea and Bentham and Mill:
For Singer, he suggests that the ‘best possible consequences’ means what is in the best interests of the individuals concerned
R.M Hare (1919-2002)
People are happy when they get what they prefer, but what we prefer may clash with the preferences of others.
Everyone's interest is consider, its equal!
Easy to apply into real life situation
More sharing of chocolate cakes and foods around!!!
Preference utilitarianism was introduced by R.M. Hare In 1981. It is a more recent form of utilitarianism.
associated with R.M. Hare, Peter Singer and Richard Brandt.
As well as, considering the best consequences in terms of 'preference satisfaction'.
By Christina Hanson
He replaces pleasure with best interests in utilitarianism....
And also suggests a utilitarian system with the 'best interests' of the people involved in ethical decision-making in situations.
Singers approach concentrates on minimizing suffering, rather than maximizing pleasure.
'An action contrary to the
preference of any being is,
unless the preference of any
being is, unless the preference
is outweighed by contrary
Bentham and Mill, they both consider about the
balance of pain and pleasure,
as Singer is not considering
what increases pleasure and diminishes pain.
The logic of moral terms like 'ought'
Facts about human nature and the human condition
Two level version of utilitarianism
Intuitive level moral principles and critical thinking
based on rule utilitarianism
based on act utilitarianism
all cases the morally right action is the one which
produces the most pleasure
the morally right action is the one that is
in accordance with a moral rule whose
would create the most happiness
in moral decision making we need to consider our own preferences and those of others.
Preference utilitarianism avoids many of the issues with classical utilitarianism because it recognizes other forms of "good" which might otherwise be overlooked in the name of pleasure
cannot explain why adultery is wrong if one's partner is not made to suffer by it
the preference of the adulterer's wife or husband matters even if the frustration of that preference wouldn't increase pain or minimize pleasure.
Like a balance scale!
moral principle that states that one should both include all affected interests when calculating the rightness of an action and weigh those interests equally
killing a person who prefers to go on living would be wrong and not killing a person who prefers to die would also be wrong.
For Singer, he argues
it is preferences, rather than human life, that we ought to value
People will share with each other, instead of being self-fish
The pursuit of pleasure (Hedonism) is wrong
Just because they enjoy a certain activity or action, it doesn't makes that activity right.
You won't know what will happen next
There will still be possibility of things won't happen in the way you expect, and a lot of people might not benefit from it
Still some people will suffer or not happy
Although it makes many people happy, it will still cause a minority of innocent people suffers, which is WRONG!