Consequentialism pt 1

Consequentialism

An ethical approach that says the moral status of an action depends on its consequences or results. The morally right action is the one that produces the best overall results.

Consequentialist outlook

The consequentialist outlook tells us to focus on improving the world and producing as much good as possible rather than focusing primarily on our own interests.

"Do as much good as you can"

This summarizes the consequentialist outlook described in the reading. Moral life requires us to improve the lives of others as well as our own.

Consequentialism and the future

Consequentialists focus on the consequences that actions or policies will produce rather than primarily asking what someone deserves because of something that happened in the past.

"Ends justify the means"

In consequentialism, the means used to achieve a goal can be morally acceptable if they produce sufficiently good results. The consequences are what ultimately determine whether the action is right.

Kantianism vs. consequentialism

Kantianism emphasizes following moral rules and obligations regardless of consequences, while consequentialism evaluates actions according to their results.

Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism is the most prominent version of consequentialism discussed in the reading. It says actions are morally right when they maximize overall well-being.

Act utilitarianism

Act utilitarianism says that in each particular situation, you should choose the action that produces the greatest overall good or well-being compared with the available alternatives.

Principle of utility

The principle of utility is the ultimate moral standard of utilitarianism: choose the action that produces the greatest overall amount of well-being.

Jeremy Bentham

Jeremy Bentham was an 18th-century British philosopher who helped establish modern utilitarianism and defended the idea that morality should consider overall happiness and suffering.

John Stuart Mill

John Stuart Mill was a major utilitarian philosopher who described utilitarian morality in terms of producing the greatest overall good and believed happiness was intrinsically valuable.

Epicurus

Epicurus was an ancient Greek thinker whose ideas about happiness and pleasure are described as philosophical ancestors of modern utilitarianism.

Hedonistic moral theory

A hedonistic moral theory identifies pleasure or happiness as good and pain or misery as bad. The Crash Course describes utilitarianism as hedonistic because it emphasizes pursuing pleasure and avoiding pain.

Well-being in act utilitarianism

According to the reading's description of act utilitarianism, well-being is the only thing that is intrinsically valuable, while faring poorly is intrinsically bad.

Intrinsic value

Intrinsic value means being valuable in itself and worth having for its own sake, rather than being valuable only because it leads to something else.

Examples of intrinsic goods

The reading gives happiness, autonomy, knowledge, and virtue as examples of things that might be intrinsically good.

Examples of intrinsic bads

The reading gives physical pain, mental anguish, sadistic impulses, and betrayal of innocents as examples of things that might be intrinsically bad.

Optimific

Optimific means producing the best overall results. An action is optimific when it creates the highest balance of good over bad compared with the available alternatives.

What makes an action morally required according to consequentialism?

An action is morally required when it produces the best overall results, meaning it is optimific.

Five steps for determining an optimific action

First identify intrinsic goods, second identify intrinsic bads, third determine your available options, fourth evaluate the results of each option, and fifth choose the option with the best overall balance of good over bad.

Step 1 of determining an optimific action

Identify what is intrinsically good, meaning what is valuable in itself and worth having for its own sake.

Step 2 of determining an optimific action

Identify what is intrinsically bad, meaning what is bad in itself.

Step 3 of determining an optimific action

Identify all of the actions that are available to you in the situation.

Step 4 of determining an optimific action

Determine the value of the results of each available action, including how much intrinsic good and intrinsic bad each option would produce.

Step 5 of determining an optimific action

Choose the action that produces the best overall balance of good over bad. This is the optimific choice and therefore the moral duty.

Consequentialism as a family of theories

Consequentialism is not one single ethical theory. It is a family of theories that agree that consequences or results are what matter morally but may disagree about what counts as intrinsically valuable.

Different versions of consequentialism

Different consequentialist theories could define the good as things such as environmental improvement, world peace, increased knowledge, or well-being.

Principle of utility and well-being

Act utilitarianism says that an action is morally required when it does more to improve overall well-being than any other available action.

Greatest good for the greatest number

This common slogan summarizes an important part of utilitarianism, but the reading explains that it can be misleading if interpreted as simply helping the largest number of people.

Why the greatest number does not always win

Utilitarianism does not automatically require choosing the option that benefits the most people. A smaller group could receive a much larger benefit, producing more overall good than a larger group receiving a small benefit.

Example of helping fewer people

Instead of giving 90% of citizens a small gas coupon, a government might use the money to prevent homelessness and starvation among the poorest 10%. If that produces more overall good, utilitarianism requires helping the smaller group.

Greatest happiness vs. greatest net happiness

Utilitarianism does not simply require the action that produces the largest amount of happiness. It requires the action that produces the best overall balance of happiness over unhappiness or misery.

Gladiator example

The reading compares gladiator contests with athletic competitions. Gladiator contests might create more total happiness for spectators but also create much more misery, so the athletic competitions could produce the better overall balance.

Net balance of happiness over misery

According to the reading's discussion of Mill, the correct utilitarian goal is to produce the greatest overall balance of happiness over misery rather than simply maximizing happiness by itself.

Utilitarianism and impartiality

Utilitarianism requires impartiality: each person's well-being matters equally when determining what action produces the best overall outcome.

Utilitarianism vs. egoism

Egoism says a person should pursue their own good, while utilitarianism says we should consider the well-being of everyone affected by our actions.

Other-regarding theory

Utilitarianism is other-regarding because it requires concern for the happiness and suffering of other sentient beings, not merely concern for yourself.

Personal interests under utilitarianism

Your interests count in utilitarianism, but your interests do not automatically count more than anyone else's simply because they are yours.

Benevolent, disinterested spectator

A benevolent, disinterested spectator considers what would be best for a group without being emotionally or personally invested in the outcome.

Why use a disinterested perspective?

Looking at a situation as though you were advising strangers can reduce personal bias and emotional attachment and make it more likely that you will reach a fair judgment about what is best overall.

Moral point of view in utilitarianism

The moral point of view requires impartial concern for everyone whose well-being could be affected by an action.