Consequentialism

consequentialism

• tells is that whether an action is right or wrong depends on its consequences/outcomes

• tells us that an action is right if the value of its consequenecs is highest when compared to all the other actions and their consequences. 

• does not distinguish between kings, queens, or anybody else. Everyone's welfare matters. 

• ex: simply get a million dollars for doing something or owe a million dollars for doing something, consequentialism tells you to choose the good thing which is getting money)

rule utilitarianism

• tells us not to assess actions directly

• instead look at whether an action conforms to a set of rules that, if it were adopted by everyone, would maximize utility

• we first look at the rules. Identify the rules that, if followed, would produce the highest net utility. Then consider whether the action conforms to that rule. If it does, rule consequentialism would allow it. If not, then it's wrong.

act utilitarianism

• tells us that an action is right just in case its outcomes has higher utility than the outcomes of any other alternative action

• it focuses on each individual action

• when we consider whether an action is right or wrong, we look directly at the net utility produced by that action

Hedonistic utilitarianism (HU)

• tells us that utility is understood in terms of net pleasure minus pain

• type of act utilitarianism that emphasizes maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain as the primary measure of utility.

• utility of an action=the overall balance of pleasure versus pain that would be produced were the action to be performed

Direct act consequentialism

• the deontic status of some particular action is explained by the intrinsic value of the consequences of THAT ACTION. It evaluates actions based on their specific outcomes rather than general rules or principles.

• ex - if you lie it will not cause any harm in a relationship, but if you dont lie and tell the truth, it will ruin the relationship, so in this case you will lie.

rule consequentialism

• rules for behavior are evaluated in terms of the value of consequences associated with them, and the the deontic status of particular are explained, not in terms of the consequences of those actions, but in terms of whether they conform to the rules selected on the basis of the value of the consequences associated with those rules

• will product the most valuable consequences

• This theory suggests that the rightness of an action is determined by whether it adheres to rules that, if generally followed, would lead to the best overall outcomes.

• ex - even though lying will save your relationship, you will not lie and instead tell the truth as lying is considered wrong

what are the core ideas of act utilitarianism

1) maximization - right actions are those in which compared to the alternative actions open to one in a situation, would produce the greatest total amount of value

2) welfarism: the well being of sentient creatures

3) universalist: the effects of ones actions on the welfare of all individuals who will be affected by what one figure does in determining the deontic status of ones actions (ex - doing an action good for you but screws over 100 people, everyone affected by your action will matter)

4) total utility: the sum of the positive and negative welfare related consequences or effects of an action (ex - pleasure of inflicting pain on someone vs the discontent of the pain the person feels)

GPU - general principle of utility

• An action A is right if and only if (and because) A would produce as high a utility as any alternative action that the agent could perform instead.

• An action A is obligatory if and only if (and because) A would produce a higher level of utility than would any other alternative action that the agent could perform instead. 

• An action A is wrong if and only if (and because) A would produce less utility than would some other alternative action that the agent could perform instead.

• An action A is optional if and only if (and because)  in terms of utility production A is tied for first place with at least one other action.

value hedonism

• experiences of pleasure alone are intrinsically good and experiences of pain are intrinsically bad

ethical hedonism (EH)

experiences of pleasures and pains are the only items of intrinsic value with which ethics is concerned

• pleasures and pains can either be bodily, mental or both

principle of hedonistic utilitarianism (PHU)

• An action A is right if and only if (and because) A would produce at least as high an overall balance of pleasure versus pain as would any other alternative action open to the agent.

objection to HU

1) quality vs quantity

• there are different types of pleasures (higher and lower pleasures)

• no amount of lower pleasures can be better than any amount of higher pleasure

• ex - live a short life filled with high amount of pleasure or live a long life with the same amount of pleasure but in small doses

2) we can’t determine the full consequences of our actions and their value

3) some peopled value reality more and want to experience pain, not only pleasure bc that is what makes life life

the demandingness objection

• if there is something that you can do that will produce a higher level of utility than an alternative action, then you ought to do it (utilitasirianism)

• ex - donating your coffee money to an effective charity will produce a higher level of utility than keeping it and buying a coffee

• This is an objection if you think that we ought not to give more. If you think that we're justified in keeping our money, then that means that act utiliarianism is somehow wrong. If you think that we should give more of our money, then maybe you think there is some truth to Act Utilitarianism.

• Problem: We can run this line of reasoning over and over again. Given consequentialism, most of us will have to give a lot more than our coffee money. We might have to give 10%, 20%, 30%, or even 80% of our incomes to charity and a lot more of our time. What happens to our personal projects, commitments, families, etc.?