consequentialism

the basic idea

• consequentialism is concerned with the idea that what is right and wrong is determined by the outcome of an action, whether it was accidental or intentional

• we can use our basic intuitions to “make the world a better place”

• what is good can differ based on the circumstances, what is good in one situation might not be in another and therefore we use the consequences as a means to judge this

• an action is right if it results in a good state

• in most cases, everyone involved remains impartial

methodology

• based on moral assumptions

• has a base belief, e.g., utilitarianism is concerned with the maximisation of individual pleasure

• often based on intution

axiology: a theory of value

• consequentialism needs a base to measure what is right and wrong, to measure the value (good) in a situation

• this is usually based on the things in the situation that are good in itself (they have intrinsic value)

moral “calculation”

• to figure out the best thing to do in a situation, you must calculate how pleasurable the outcome will be

• Bentham used the hedonic calculus for this which considered the amount of people effected by the action and the amount of individual pleasure that would be produced

• however, this can cause an impartial spectator approach where individual agents feelings and emotions are not taken into account

problems with act utilitarianism

• it focuses on the sum of pleasure, if pleasure isn’t measurable then how is this possible?

• we don’t always have time to sit and calculate the situation, sometimes we need to think fast

other objections

• people have feelings so to remain impartial would be hard, we respond to other peoples emotions so to ignore them just to make it “fair” seems wrong

• can it justify punishment? it isn’t pleasurable for the criminal so it would have to benefit a significant amount of people to make it fit act utilitarianism

• you can’t always accurately predict the outcome of a situation before it has happened and so this would only work if the consequences of the action were definite

John Stuart mill

• he attempted to fix utilitarianism through rule utilitarianism

• he was heavily influenced by Bentham but regretted that he was educated to the point in being a “Benthamite thinking machine”

demandingness objection

• we can’t always do better than we are already doing

• its too demanding to say we must be doing good all the time and maximising pleasure all the time as this sets not limit to what is good enough, when does it stop?

mills qualitative hedonism

• mill saw that utilitarianism ought to focus more on individual happiness rather than the sum of it

• he saw act utilitarianism as a “pig philosophy”

• his answer to this is to see that some kinds of pleasure are more valuable than others as there is a difference between happiness and being content

rule criticisms

• not everyone can achieve happiness in every situation, it is too ambitious of an aim for morality

• rule utilitarianism suggests that we should sacrifice our own happiness for others as it isn’t concerned with equal pleasure

• it is a godless moral theory