consequentialism

consequentialism

• consequentialism evaluates morality actions based on outcomes/consequences, not fixed rules

• goal - maximise overall good or minimise harm

• contrast to absolutist frameworks [e.g. duties/rights] which prioritise unchanging principles, C allows rule breaking if it leads to a greater purpose

key concepts

• closely linked with British utilitarians [philosophers like Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill, Henry Sidgewick] sought a measure of goodness/moral righteousness

• focus on outcomes - ethicality of actions depends on whether they produce the best consequences

act utilitarianism

• focuses on evaluating individual actions based on consequences

• Jeremy Bentham’s approach called the Hedonistic Calculus was a method for quantifying pleasure or pain

• according to Bentham, an experiences value [whether it brings pleasure/pain] depends on:

  • intensity

  • duration

  • certainty - how likely to occur?

  • proximity - how immediate is it?

  • fecundity - will it lead to more pleasure/pain?

  • purity - is it free from opposite sensation?

  • extent - how many people are affected

• example - ford pinto case

  • ford used cost benefit analysis to decide not to fix fuel tank design flaw, balancing cost of potential harm to customers against financial cost of redesigning car

  • highlights limitations of purely consequential reasoning

ideal utilitarianism [objective good utilitarianism]

• expands traditional utilitarianism beyond just pleasure or happiness

• attempts to address criticisms that utilitarianism reduces life to pursuit of pleasure by focusing on achieving what is objectively good

ideal utilitarianism - John Stuart Mill

• Mill argued not all pleasures are equal:

  • higher pleasures - intellectual, moral and cultural achievements

  • lower pleasures - physical or sensory pleasures

• believed that higher pleasures are more valuable than lower pleasures as they contribute to human flourishing and richer life experience

• Mill’s ideal utilitarianism:

  • aims at common good - decisions should benefit society as a whole, not just individuals

  • consider long term societal benefits - decisions should be evaluated based on long term consequences

  • promote moral education - promotes fostering social concern

ideal utilitarianism - business ethics

• according to Gustafson [2013] utilitarianism offers a framework for ethical decision making in business

• this means guiding decisions not just toward immediate profit or pleasure but toward maximising social benefit and common good

rule utilitarianism

• assess consequences of following rules, asking “what would happen if everyone followed this rule“ instead of evaluating individual actions

• goal being to create rules that if followed, lead to the greatest overall good/utility

• key features:

  • binding rules create predictability and universally acceptable standards

  • example - codes of ethics in medicine and law promote trust and public good

applications of consequentialism

• evidence based medicine:

  • NICE - uses cost utility analysis to allocate healthcare resources

  • QALY’s - ensures interventions with the greatest societal benefit are prioritised

• cost benefit analysis in public projects:

  • example: M4 relief road

    • weighs time saved for commuters against environmental impact, e.g. CO2 emissions

    • raises questions about prioritising short term benefits over long term harm to future generations

rule, ideal and act utilitarianism

• act - evaluates morality of individual actions based on specific consequences, focusing on maximising happiness or reducing suffering in each situation

• rule - evaluates whether following general rule creates better outcomes, emphasising predictability and societal well being

• ideal - focuses on achieving objectively good outcomes, like justice/intellectual development, rather than just maximising happiness

  • e.g. supporting an educational program, even if it doesn’t maximise immediate happiness

criticisms of consequentialism

• prediction difficulties - predicting outcome of actions is difficult, and uncertain consequences makes C reasoning unreliable

• immeasurable outcomes - some benefits or harms are difficult to quantify, complicating application of a strictly C approach

• competing claims - when different groups have competing claims it is hard to weigh claims fairly

• individual rights - C may justify actions that violate individual rights if those actions lead to greater overall happiness, conflicting with moral intuition

• self interest - C thinking may overlook value of personal commitments, focusing on broader outcomes rather individual relationships/responsibilities

philosopher Sinnott-Armstrong says these challenges make C more suitable for large scale public policy decisions rather than personal or corporate ethical dilemmas

exam

• act utilitarianism:

  • examine specific action and its immediate consequences and benefits

• rule utilitarianism:

  • consider long term outcomes of following it as a general rule

  • e.g. if companies regularly replace workers with contractors, does it erode trust and wellbeing in society

• ideal utilitarianism:

  • focus on higher values like justice fairness or intellectual growth

  • e.g. does this action promote broader societal benefits or merely short term gain?