Utilitarianism- revisions guide chapter 4

What are trolley problems?

-made by Philippa Foot- shows contrast between deontological and teleological ethics

What happens in the trolley problems?

-in each, a person is standing by a elever that can switch a railway/car/trolley between tracks

-agent is required to choose between doing nothing- causing harm, taking action- lesser harm but they are now directly responsible

What would a utilitarian who believes in maximising pleasure and minimising pain do in the trolley problem?

-take action to reduce harm even if they are directly responsible

First trolley problem?

-trolley heading towards 5 people but you can divert it to strike an elderly drunk person asleep on the other track

Second problem?

-trolley heading towards 5 convicted murderers but you can divert it to strike a small child playing on the track

Third problem?

-trolley heading towards Nobel Prize-winning scientists, you can divert it to strike a heavily pregnant woman

Fourth problem?

-trolley heading towards 5 dogs, you can divert it to hit a terminally ill man

What is utilitarianism?

argues the good/right thing to do is that which leads to the greatest goods for the greatest number

What kind of theory is utilitarianism?

-relativist- “right” and “wrong” not fixed at all times/places

-teological- right/wrong depends on the outcome

-Bentham- greater good equated to pleasure (hedonism)

Who is Jeremy Bentham?

-son of a lawyer- wrote/lived to utilitarian principles

-social reformer arguing against slavery, supported votes for women and the decriminalisation of homosexuality

-key ideas: utilitarianism, both political/ethical

What are humans motivated by according to Bentham?

-pleasure and pain- we’re naturally inclined to do things that give us pleasure and to avoid things that cause pain.

-presents simple moral rule of utilitarianism

What is the Utility Principle- Bentham?

-we should do whatever leads to greatest balance of good over evil, the thing that brings about the greatest pleasure/least amount of pain

-utility means usefulness- do whatever is useful to achieve this end

What is Bentham’s almost mathematical way of calculating the overall pleasure and pain involved with something?

the hedonic calculus

In the hedonic calculus, what factors do we need to consider when making a moral decision?

-intensity- how strong is the pleasure/ pain involved?

-duration- how long will the pleasure/ pain last?

-certainty-how sure are we that the anticipated pleasure/ pain will occur?

-propinquity- how soon will the pleasure/ pain occur?

-fecundity- how likely is it that the pleasure will lead to further pleasure?

-purity- how likely is it that pain will result from the original pleasure?

-extent- how many people will be affected?

What does the hedonic calculus method of considering pleasure and pain require we consider?

-long-term consequences- fecundity and duration ensure we shouldn’t seek short-term pleasure at the expense of long-term pain.

-not a selfish ethical theory-focus on extent/ purity requires we consider how each individual is affected

What is a common objection to utilitarianism?

it’s a “swine ethic”- treats us like animals

-assumes we are creatures that value pleasure identically

-Bentham claimed poetry was just as pleasurable as a childish game- not right

In Bentham’s utilitarianism, what could be supported?

-acts of violence

-the pleasure of the attacker could outweigh the pain of the victim

-Bentham wouldn’t intend this but the system cannot avoid this

Who was John Stuart Mill?

-child genius, father was friends with Bentham

-interest in social justice and politics and ethics

-classic works- “On Liberty”

-desire for women’s rights after his marriage

-key ideas: utilitarianism, non-harm principle and equal rights for women

What does Mill’s utilitarianism aim to do to Bentham’s?

-correct the major defects

-Bentham’s utilitarianism is quantitative and suggests we can CALCULATE the pleasures/ pains of a situation

What two types of pleasures does Mill say there are?

-Higher pleasures: intellectual and social, only humans can enjoy- e.g a conversation or enjoying art

-Lower pleasures:body pleasures enjoyed by humans and creatures alike, e.g food, sleep, sex

What does Mill suggest about higher pleasures?

they are more important

How does Mill’s higher and lower pleasures make murder wrong?

-killing is a lower pleasure that doesn’t outweigh the pain caused

What risk does Bentham’s quantitative utilitarianism risk allowing?

-”tyranny of the majority”- majority pleasure can justify ignoring the suffering of a minority

-non-harm principle- Mill believes each individual should live freely unless they cause harm to others. Law only necessary to prevent harm to others

Reasons utilitarianism is helpful in making moral decisions?

-utilitarianism (Bentham’s version) is relatively straightforward- the key idea is not difficult to understand

-difficult to object to basic principle that happiness is good-everyone wants to be happy. Utilitarianism has a good aim

-secular ethical theory- doesn’t rely on God/ other metaphysical ideas that cannot be proven in order to justify its decisions

-utilitarianism- democratic, counts everyone equally regardless of who they are- each persons potential pains/ pleasures considered.

-Theory also requires we are impartial in decision making- doesn’t count those nearer to us e.g family as more significant than a stranger

Reasons utilitarianism is not helpful for moral decisions?

-straightforward idea, but application of it isn’t. Many variables/factors to consider- also difficult to know how far to take the consequences of an action. A small decision can have repercussions that affect future generations

-requires we can make a prediction of the outcome of an action. Not always obvious- e.g telling the truth v telling a lie . Cannot predict the future

-everyone is considered but the greatest good for the greatest number leads to poorer treatment of minority groups/ disregards rights to serve the “greater good”. Bentham refers to rights as “nonsense on stilts”!

-difficult to measure pleasure and pain

-disregards moral agency. Though experiment- “Jim and the Indians”, Bernard Williams gives situation where a utilitarian can save 10 lives by killing someone. It is right, but difficult. This is because we are moral agents who must live after we act.

What are the 2 different approaches to achieving the greatest good for the greatest number known as?

-ACT and RULE utilitarianism

What is act utilitarianism?

-aims to produce best balance of good over evil in EACH CASE

-situations taken case-by-case

-e.g Bentham’s hedonic calculus

-act utilitarian may give different answers to the same action, depending on situation/context

-TRUTH for example can be good or bad, depends!

What is Rule utilitarianism?

-also aims for greatest balance of good and evil but had common good of SOCIETY rather than individuals as it starting point

-suggests we do know the actions that typically lead to pleasure/happiness- e.g stealing tends to cause more misery to victims then pleasure to the thief (and they could be jailed)

-so we can say STEALING is WRONG

-worth noting unlike other rule-based ethical theories, rules are not fixed: basis of rules is utilitarian

-greater good/greatest happiness can change if society changes

What is a further distinction within rule utilitarianism?

-STRONG and WEAK rule utilitarianism

What would a strong rule utilitarian argue?

-once we have decided the rules that lead to the greatest good, they are fixed and cannot be broken under any circumstances

What would a weak rule utilitarian argue?

-make allowances for exceptions- whilst rules tend to lead to the greatest good and should be followed generally, there are cases that require a rule to be broken

Why is it debated on whether Mill is an act or rule utilitarian?

-he argues past experience of human beings does allow us to know the tendencies of actions

-his non-harm principles are rules that would seem to allow society to flourish- RULE?

-however he is aware of the problem posed by Kant of the murderer seeking his next victim- Mill’s view is that it would be sensible to lie- WEAK RULE?

Reasons Act utilitarianism is a better approach to moral decision making?

-case-by-case decision-making of it allows flexibility+ recognises situations as unique. However, can take more time to weigh up complex factors in each situations

-rule utilitarianism-in an incoherent position, particularly in weak rule as the theory collapses into act utilitarianism anyway (J.J.C.Smart)

Reasons rule utilitarianism is a better approach to moral decision-making?

-RULE offers a quicker approach to decision-making is unnecessary+ time consuming.However there can be situations where utilitarian rules can clash and a different approach would be needed to decide between them

-allows us to make rules that upholds justice and rights, two things that may be lost in individual cases for the act utilitarian. McCloskey example- sheriff chooses to arrest an innocent man for the greater goodw ould be allowed by an act utilitarian but can’t be justified by a rule utilitarian as persistent unjust acts would undermine justice itself.

How does Mill argue in favour of the notion that to some extent we can measure pleasure/goodness?

-argues if we want to know what is good/desirable we should look at what people actually desire

-people seek pleasure and happiness-they pursue it as an end itself- everything desirable contributes to this goal

-this reality observation tells us happiness is a good thing and it should be pursued

What analogy reinforces Mill’s point that we should look to people to find out what is desirable?

-if we want to know what is/isn’t visible, we can only prove this by asking what can be seen

-similarly, we can only find what is desirable by asking what people desire

-criticism- what people desire/aim for does not establish a NORMATIVE claim that this OUGHT to be desired

-we can measure happiness by what they desire- but that doesn’t make the desires good

What is a variation related to the difficulty of measuring pleasure and pain?

-the distribution problem

What is the distribution problem?

-assuming we can measure pleasure, this raises the problem that we may create the same overall amount of happiness/ pleasure but it may be distributed differently

Distribution problem scenario?

-decision A may lead to X person being happier (10 hedons) and persons Y, Z being slightly happier (1 hedon each), then it creates 12 hedons

-however, we could reach the same overall happiness with decision B, giving 4 hedons to each person- same overall happiness with a very different outcome

What do philosophers argue the distribution problem proves?

reinforces criticism that it is difficult/impossible to measure pleasure and pain in the way that utilitarians hope

Reasons it could be argued that pleasure, happiness or goodness CAN be measured?

-Mill’s argument that happiness is desirable rests on assumption that we can observe what people desire and presumably have some measure of whether they are achieving these desires - on a crude level we can have some measures of pleasure/pain

-preference versions of utilitarianism avoid some of the difficulties of measuring pleasure, argue overall utility/happiness lies in PREFERENCE satisfaction. we can research the relative happiness of people in terms of reaching their life goals, to some degree

-as neuroscience advances it could be possible to measure happiness/pleasure in terms of observing what is happening in the brain during key moments. The existence of portable brain scanners permanently attached to us could make measurement of pain/ pleasure possible

Reasons pleasure, happiness or goodness CANNOT be measured?

-measurable things tend to have a unit, e.g time has minutes, mass has grams- no obvious units to measure pleasure/pain

-further difficulties in measuring pleasure and pain lie in fact that pleasure and pain are subjective to the individual. We enjoy different things and each of us have a unique pain threshold, perhaps be willing to suffer more pain for the greater good. Suggests if any version of utilitarianism is to succeed it would need to be preference that doesn’t require this measurement

-assuming pleasure/pain can be measured requires Bentham’s simple version of utilitarianism “push penny is as good as poetry”. Yet Mill says there are higher and lower pleasures-how should higher pleasures be weighted? Are they worth twice lower pleasures? Three or four times?

-Nozick’s experience machine and Moore’s open question argument, both raise possibility that even if we actually could measure pleasure, we aren’t necessarily measuring the GOOD

What do modern utilitarians think of the focus on pleasure?

-too narrow

-pleasure isn’t the most valuable demonstrated by Nozick’s though experiment of the experience machine

Why could it be argued that the understanding of utility as pleasure is not bad?

-focus on higher/lower pleasures led Mill to develop the non-harm principle- suggests to secure the pleasure of most individuals, society should only adopt laws that prevent harm onto others

-adopted by various political thinkers over the last century

What is a popular form of modern utilitarianism?

Preference utilitarianism- held by Peter Singer and others

What is preference utilitarianism?

-recognises different people have different views on what happiness is

-we have unique aims in life and different things we consider important- our preferences and interests

-argues people should pursue their preferences as long as this does not interfere with anyone else’s pursuit of happiness

-moral thing to do- maximises satisfaction of the preferences/interests of most people

-doing this we must imagine ourselves as “impartial observers”- free from personal biases and considering what each individual would truly want

What does Singer argue?

-the preferences of all people should be taken into account

-writes on animal rights- many could be considered persons: just because they cannot ARTICULATE their desires, we can consider them as we would do for a child/ disabled person

-we can still act considering their interests

Advantage of Singer’s preference utilitarianism?

-easier to measure

-also allows individuals to pursue their own interests and not be restricted by what the majority deems as happiness

-avoids tyranny of the majority- an issue for Bentham

-retains flexibility of resolving different cases/issues differently as we aren’t tied to rule utilitarianism

More recently, how has Singer’s utilitarianism differed?

-more of a hedonistic view of utilitarianism- more focused on avoiding pain

-”The Life You Can Save”- argues it is morally wrong for us not to donate to charities that alleviate extreme poverty- we cannot save everyone but by having a few less luxury items we can save a child’s life

Reasons for utility being a good basis for moral judgement?

-utilitarianism-progressive and the arguments based on these principles have decriminalised gays, banned slavery and given women suffrage

-idea of utility gives a decision procedure. Some other ethical theories e.g KANT(KUNT) promises clarity, but when duties clash there is no easy way for resolving the issue. Utilitarianism provides a way of resolving each dilemma

-similarly, utilitarianism offers a pragmatism that works in the real world- other ethical theories offer theoretical solutions that don’t work in practice

Reasons utility is a poor basis for making moral judgements?

-Nozick’s experience machine seems to show if utility is understood in terms of pleasure, this is not the thing that is most important to us

-if we assume utility is something similar to preference satisfaction then it is unclear whose preferences do/ don’t count

-preference satisfaction is not easily quantifiable- goes against spirit of utilitarianism

-utility-too demanding. Greater happiness always chieved by giving money/resources to the por rather then treating oneself, which becomes immoral

-could be argued other motivations, such as duty,agape or telos represent better moral motivations

What is Nozicks thought experiment on the experience machine?

-imagine scientists invent a machine that will give you every possible pleasurable sensation you could ever wish to have- favourite food, good grades without any REAL life experiences

-Nozick suggests most of us would decline- we value our real-life experiences more