Introducing
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
> Man is under two great masters, pain and pleasure.
> The great good that we should seek is happiness. (a hedonistic perspective)
> Those actions whose results increase happiness or diminish pain are good. They have “utility.”
Principle of Utility: The best action is that which produces the greatest happiness and/or reduces pain.
> Ethical philosophy differs from the sciences because it is normative or prescriptive, rather than descriptive.
>In other words, ethics tell us how we ought to act or what we should do, while the sciences are more likely to observe how things are in nature or society.
> Utilitarianism says that the Result or the Consequence of an Act is the real measure of whether it is good or bad.
>This theory emphasizes Ends over Means.
>Theories, like this one, that emphasize the results or consequences are called teleological or consequentialist.
> In determining the quantity of happiness that might be produced by an action, we evaluate the possible consequences by applying several values:
Intensity, duration, certainty or uncertainty, propinquity or remoteness, fecundity, purity, and extent.
Consequentialism: The rightness of actions is determined solely by their consequences.
Hedonism: Utility is the degree to which an act produces pleasure. Hedonism is the thesis that pleasure or happiness is the good that we seek and that we should seek.
Maximalism: A right action produces the greatest good consequences and the least bad.
Universalism: The consequences to be considered are those of everyone affected, and everyone equally.
Mill’s Answer to the
“Godless Theory” Criticism
What is the nature of God?
Does God make arbitrary rules just to see if we will obey?
Does God make rules that He knows will lead to our happiness?
If the latter statement is true, doesn’t it make sense God would want us to use our God-given reason to look at the situation?
Mill’s Answer to the “Godless Theory” Criticism
Criticisms of Utilitarianism
“If it be a true belief that God desires, above all things, the happiness of his creatures, and that this was his purpose in their creation, utility is not a godless doctrine, but more profoundly religious than any other. . . . .whatever God has though fit to reveal on the subject of morals must fulfill the requirements of utility in a supreme degree.”
ADVANTAGES
of UTILITARIANISM
A Second Criticism of Utilitarianism
Criticisms of Utilitarianism
If one must decide the probable outcome of an act before knowing whether it is good or bad, how can children learn to evaluate acts, since they know so little of what consequences might arise from their actions?
Mill’s “Rule” Utilitarianism
“ . . . Mankind must by this time have acquired positive beliefs as to the effects of some actions on their happiness; and the beliefs which have thus come down are the rules of morality for the multitude, and for the philosopher until he has succeeded in finding better.” Mill concludes, however, that we should always seek improvements.
Bernard Williams criticizes the implied “doctrine of negative responsibility” in Utilitarianism. For example, a thug breaks into my home and holds six people hostage, telling us he will kill all of us. “However,” the thug says, “if you will kill two of your family, I will let you and the other three live.”
With Utilitarianism, the good thing to do is to kill two members of my family.
Utilitarianism plays fast and loose with God’s commandments. If lying, stealing, or killing could lead to an increase of happiness for the greatest number, we are told we should lie, steal or kill. Isn’t that a rejection of God’s commands?
Rights and Utilitarianism
Can’t predict future (e.g. Doctor saving woman in childbirth and saying, “You’ll be alright now, Mrs. Hitler”)
>Many philosophers hold that we have certain rights, either from God, nature, or from a social contract
>Can the idea of rights be made compatible with Utilitarianism?
>If ignoring rights brings about more happiness to the greatest number, should we ignore so-called rights?
>Mill’s rule-based view in On Liberty; having a right to liberty will bring the greatest happiness
Special responsibilities (e.g. save drowning father or scientist with cure for cancer)
Justice e.g. utilitarian judge could sentence an innocent person to death if it would restore law and order
Consequences of Unethical Practices
It is easy to demonstrate that Utilitarianism is fair, since its basic principles are widely accepted.
Baucus & Baucus (2000)
>Singled out 67 companies out of the Fortune 500 that had at least one illegal act – ex: antitrust, product liabilities, discrimination
>Performance of the convicted firms were compared to unconvicted firms (five year after the fraud was committed)
>Convicted firms experienced significantly lower return on sales (three year lag)
>Multiple convictions are more disastrous
>Unethical activities can affect long term performance
ADVANTAGES
of UTILITARIANISM
It does not appear to require any prior beliefs about the nature of the world or religion, and can be appreciated across different religions and cultures.
Utilitarianism is the moral side of democracy. E.g. it is the basis for the NHS: care is provided to improve the health of the population and if more money is spent on the health service, people are healthier and therefore happier
It relates to actions which can be observed in the real world e.g. giving to charity promotes happiness for poor people and is seen to be good, whereas an act of cruelty is condemned as bad.
Consequentialism is also a strength as when we act it is only natural to weigh up the consequences.
Preference Utilitarianism also gives us the valuable principle of ‘standing in someone else’s shoes’ (Hare). It is important to think about others’ interests or preferences as long as one also includes behaving justly.