Utilitarianism

What is utilitarianism?

the doctrine that actions are right if they are useful or for the benefit of a majority

What is consequentialism

Utilitarianism takes a consequentialist approach meaning the consequences of an act are what matters

Jeremy Bentham

Hedonistic act utilitarian

What is the appeal of utilitarianism

\-It doesn’t rely on theology so is appropriate in a secular society

\-It is a fact that people seek pleasure over pain

\-We can verify what makes people happy, it is moral empiricism

\-All people count equally

Hedonism

What is good for an individual is what promotes happiness or pleasure (quantitative apporach)

Psychological hedonism

Everything we do is motivated by pleasure seeking/ pain avoidance

The hedonistic calculus

Remoteness( how near it is)

Purity(how free from pain it is)

Richness(what extent it will lead to other pleasures)

Intensity(how powerful it is)

Certainty(how likely it is to result)

Extent(how many people it affects)

Duration(how long it lasts)

John Stuart Mill

Non-hedonistic rule utilitarian

Higher and lower pleasures

A qualitative approach from Mill, dividing pleasures into higher and lower. Higher pleasures are the mins and lower are the body

Why are higher pleasures better?

It is better to seek long-term intellectual pleasure, even if you don’t get it, over bodily pleasure as it provides more quality of happiness

Hedonism argument

P1-Hedonism claims that utility is pleasure

P2-The experience machine would give maximum utility

P3-Many people would not plug in

C1-Therefore, many do not regard pleasure as the only good

C2-Therefore, hedonism is false

Act utilitarianism

Choose the action that will produce the greatest good for the greatest number

Rule utilitarianism

We should live by the rules that, in general, are likely to lead to the greatest good for the greatest number

Issues with utilitarianism

\-Ignores intentions

\-Issues with calculation

\-Moral integrity

\-No individual intrinsic rights

Problem with hedonism

\-Pleasure isn’t always the only good (experience machine)

\-All pleasures aren’t equal

\

How are the higher and lower pleasures decided upon?

\-Something is a lower pleasure if animals can access it as they cannot experience higher pleasures

\-A pleasure is only higher if people who have experience of both type of pleasure prefer one

What fact about our behaviour poses a problem for Mill, how would he respond

Not everyone understands/ enjoys what Mill considers higher pleasures

\-Mill responds people know the difference between the two even if they don’t choose it

Advantages of utilitarianism

\-Universal

\-Absence of suffering

\-Intuitive

\-Reflected in the laws we have

Qualitative

The value of the pleasure itself

Quantitative

The amount of pleasure

Strong rule utilitarianism

Does not allow breaking the rules under any circumstances

Weak rule utilitarianism

On some occasions we do have to break the rules

Preference utilitarianism- Peter Singer (non-hedonistic)

Nozick’s experience machine- not everyone would regard pleasure as in their interests

\-Perhaps maximising utility should refer to maximising people getting what they want

Against preference utilitarianism

What you want isn’t always good for you…

Jim wants to drink a cup of tea, but the tea is poisoned

Kim is having suicidal desires

Jim and the Indians- Bernard Williams

\-Jim finds himself in a small South American town, tied up against the wall are a row of twenty Indians

\-They are about to be killed to remind other possible protesters of the advantages of not protesting

\-However, since Jim is an honored visitor from another land, the captain is happy to offer him the privilege of killing one Indian himself- if he accepts the other Indian’s will be let off

\-If he refuses there will be no special occasion and the Captain will kill them all

What problem does Williams’ example highlight

How can Jim decide who to kill? How do we know if he is a moral person? Or if the people he kept alive didn’t cause themselves to be perceived in a better light?

What does Jim and the Indians show?

Consequentialism fails to respect the integrity of the individual- all that matters is the outcome

The consequence of consequentialism is that by taking an impersonal standpoint we alienate ourselves

Disregarding our integrity and alienating ourselves from our values and social ideas is likely to result in a life of unhappiness

What did Bentham and Mill define as the ‘final end’

happiness

Hedonistic and preference similarities

* Both consequentialist
* The right act maximises utility for the greatest number
* egalitarian
* no such thing as intrinsic human rights

Preference vs hedonism

* H- Utility is understood as pleasure and the avoidance of pain

P- Utility is understood as the satisfaction of preferences
* H-Faces the issue raised by Nozick in the ‘experience machine’

P-Is supported by Nozick’s ‘experience machine’ because people seem to value things other than pleasure
* H-pleasure and pain can be harder to predict

P-we can ask people their preferences making calculation easier

Act and rule utilitarianism similarities

* Both consequentialist
* The right act maximises utility for the greatest number
* Egalitarian
* No such thing as intrinsic human rights

\

Act vs Rule utilitarianism

* A-The right act is the one that maximises utility on a particular occasion, case-by-case basis

R-The right act is the one that conforms to the rule that maximises utility overall when followed
* A-The right act will maximise utility at that time

R-The right act may not maximise utility at that time but will do so overall
* A-Problems of calculation, utility calculus is time consuming

R-Reduces problems of calculation, only have to learn the rules and apply them
* A-No individual liberties or rights

R-Rights can be given as a rule, but only exist to maximise happiness

Quantitative and qualitative hedonism similarities

* Both consequentialist
* Right act maximises utility for the greatest number
* Utility/ happiness is understood to be plesure and avoidance of pain
* Egalitarian

Quantitative(Bentham) vs qualitative(Mill) hedonism

* Quant-All pleasures are equal and should be treated so in calculating the right act

Qual-The value of pleasures differs
* Quant-The quantity of the pleasure is all that matters

Qual-The quality of the pleasure is more important than the quantity
* Quant-No distinction between bodily and intellectual pleasures

Qual-Higher pleasures are those of the mind and lower pleasures are pleasures of the body
* Quant-The right act simply maximises units of pleasure

Qual-The right act could be less ‘pleasurable’ in simple terms but not when we consider quality

Issue of Nozick’s experience machine

Shows that people may value something other than pleasure, as they wouldn’t choose to plug in

Issue of fairness and individual liberty

The only thing that matters in utilitarianism is maximising utility

e.g if a homeless mans organs can be used to save the lives of 5 people, the utilitarian would do this as pleasure is maximised for the 5 people

This shows that the individual is expendable as a means to reach this end

Issue of calculation

The utility calculus is impractical

e.g if a man was dying and you were stuck in a traffic jam- how would you be able to calculate which act brings about the most pleasure

Issue of partiality

The only consideration when making a decision is how much happiness is produced- this leaves no room for placing value on particular relationships e.g friends/ family

e.g imagine your mother and a scientist, who is on the brink of curing cancer are both seriously ill. According to utilitarianism- saving the scientist would result in the most happiness

Utilitarianism doesn’t seem to understand the nature of close relationships

e.g if you were visiting a friend in hospital and they said ‘thank you’ you wouldn’t reply ‘It’s nothing, I’m just maximising utility’

Friendship requires that the friend is valued

Issue of moral integrity and intentions of the individual

Some acts that produce the most happiness can be morally repugnant to some individuals

e.g Jim and the Indians

The utilitarian approach is that Jim should kill one villager- if he doesn’t he holds negative responsibility and would be as guilty as the Captain

BUT THE ISSUE IS THAT IT IGNORES JIM’S MORAL INTEGRITY