consequentialism and utilitarianism

type of moral theory according to which consequences of actions are all that matter in determining the rightness and wrongness of actions.

Consequentialism Definition

The “right action” is understood in entirely in terms of the overall intrinsic value of the consequences of the action compared to the overall intrinsic value of the consequences associated with any alternative action an agent could have performed instead.

What is the guiding idea of consequentialism?

An action is morally right if and only if (and because) its consequences are at least as good as any other choice available to the agent.

What are the conditions of the “right action“ in Consequentialism?

Consequentialism characterizes or defines right action in terms of intrinsic value, so it is moral based.

First, consequentialist moral theory is a value-based moral theory. Meaning?

In circumstances calling for a moral choice, an agent is confronted by a range of alternative actions, any one of which she might choose to perform.

Secondly, Consequentialism involves the fairly intuitive idea of alternative actions open to an agent. Meaning?

The rightness (or wrongness) of an action depends on how much intrinsic value it would likely produce compared to how much intrinsic value alternative actions would likely produce (if performed)

Third (and relatedly), consequentialism is a comparative theory of right action. Meaning?

We are to perform that action, from among the alternatives, whose consequences will have at least as much overall value as any other.

Fourth, the consequentialist account of right action is a maximizing conception. Meaning?

The rightness or wrongness of an action is made to depend on the values of the consequences for everyone who is affected by the action, where everyone affected counts equally.

Fifth, and finally, consequentialism is a strongly impartialist moral theory in the sense that…

Some versions take happiness or welfare alone to have intrinsic value are versions of utilitarianism, whereas those that take human perfection to have intrinsic value are versions of perfectionism.

Consequentialism is a general type of moral theory that has a variety of species. Consequentialists may differ over the issue of what has intrinsic value in what ways?

A sub-variety of Consequentialism. Happiness, pleasure, or human welfare are the only things that matter in themselves. An action is morally right if it produces the greatest amount of net happiness for the greatest number of people affected.

Utilitarianism Definition

one maximize welfare where the welfare of all individuals who will be affected by some action counts. (everyone is equal)

As a consequentialist theory, utilitarianism requires that…

The net value of the consequences of actions. The net value of an act’s consequences refers to how much overall welfare or happiness would likely result from an action, taking into account both the short-term and long-term effects of the action on the welfare of all who will be affected.

Utility

For each alternative action, then, we can consider the net balance of overall happiness versus unhappiness associated with that action.

The overall net value of the utility of an action.

An action is right if and only if (and because) it would likely produce at least as high a utility (net overall balance of happiness versus unhappiness) as would any alternative action one might perform instead.

The Principle of Utility

It may turn out that the right action in some unfortunate circumstance is the one that would likely bring about the least amount of overall negative utility. This would be where all of one’s options have a negative utility.

The Principle of Utility reveal the utility of an action might be negative. What does this mean in terms of deciding what is the “better“ action to take?

Value Hedonism

Pleasure is the only thing with positive intrinsic value (good for its own sake) and pain is the only thing with negative intrinsic value (bad for its own sake).

Something that has inherent value or value for “it’s own sake“ or ““in of itself“

What is intrinsic value?

They should recognize both passive pleasures and pain (aesthetic, intellectual, bodily) and active pleasures (playing a game) in order to recognize a broad range of pleasurable experiences that have positive intrinsic value and a broad range of painful experiences that have negative intrinsic value.

The value hedonist will value does not need to take an excessively narrow view of pleasure and pain. Meaning?

Hedonistic Utilitarianism

An action is right if and only if (and because) it would likely produce at least as high a net balance of pleasure (or less pain) as would any other alternative action one might do instead.

it would have me invite the speaker whose talk will produce the greatest amount of overall happiness.

1. Consider each person who will be affected by the lecture of Dr. Brilliant and determine how much happiness (if any) that person would experience as a result of this lecture

2. Determine how much unhappiness (if any) that person would experience as a result of this lecture.

3. Once I have done this calculation for each person, I then calculate how much total happiness the lecture would cause and how much total unhappiness it would cause in order to arrive at the overall net value associated with Dr. Brilliant’s lecture. I do the same for Dr. Flash

The lecture I should sponsor and hence the philosopher I ought to invite depends on which talk will result in the greatest amount of intrinsic value.

HOWEVER, there are 4 factors that go into calculating.

Applying Utilitarian Consequentialism: Suppose that I am in charge of inviting a guest philosopher to speak at my university and that I’ve narrowed the choices to two. On the one hand, I can invite Dr. Brilliant, a very well-known and innovative philosopher but whose manner of presentation is decidedly dull. The philosophy faculty will no doubt take pleasure in his presentation and will benefit intellectually from what he has to say, but others will be bored stiff and get little out of the talk. On the other hand, I can invite Dr. Flash, who is not nearly as accomplished as Dr. Brilliant but who I know is an extremely engaging speaker. Suppose that five professional philosophers and forty-five students are expected to attend the lecture no matter which of these two philosophers I invite. How will utilitarian consequentialism be applied to make this decision?

1. Info about one’s circumstances

2. Info about various alternative actions one might perform in one’s particular circumstances

3. Info about the individuals who will be affected either negatively or positively were one to perform a particular action

4. Info about the overall amount of happiness or unhappiness (short term and long term) that would likely result from each of the various alternative actions.

4 Factors of calculating the utility for utilitarian consequentialism (for the scenario)

TRUE

Consequentialism is FULLY based on the consequences, so nothing can be INHERENTLY wrong.