Utilitarianism and Kantian Ethics Overview

Act vs Rule Utilitarianism

• Act Utilitarianism: Evaluates each action based on the consequences it produces for the greatest happiness.
• Rule Utilitarianism: Focuses on the rules that generally lead to the greatest good, thus allowing for consistency and predictability in moral actions.
• Hedonistic Calculus: A method introduced by Bentham for calculating the overall happiness produced by an action.

Core Concepts of Utilitarianism

• Utilitarianism seeks the “greatest good for the greatest number.” It minimizes suffering and maximizes happiness without consideration for individual rights.
• Bentham vs. Mill: Bentham employed a quantitative approach, suggesting a cost-benefit analysis for actions; Mill refined this to consider quality of pleasures.

The Categorical Imperative (Kantian Ethics)

• Emphasizes that actions must adhere to universal laws applicable to all rational beings.
• Two types of imperatives:
  • Hypothetical Imperatives: Conditional and dependent on desires or goals. They are changeable and thus not reliable for moral decision-making.
  • Categorical Imperative: Unconditional; acts should only be performed if they can be made universal laws.

Moral Dilemmas and Thought Experiments

• Thought experiments used to illustrate moral dilemmas, asking the student to apply Kantian or utilitarian perspectives to scenarios.
• Example scenarios may include:
  • Sneaking onto public transport without paying due to personal circumstances.
  • A situation involving a friendship where honesty may lead to unintended harm for one party.

Deontological Ethics vs Consequentialism

• Consequentialism (like utilitarianism) allows for the manipulation of circumstances for a perceived greater good.
• Kantian Ethics: Strict adherence to moral duties that protect individual rights, regardless of consequences. A person cannot be used as a means to an end.

Trust and Moral Responsibility

• Kantian ethics emphasize that trust is eroded when individuals act in their own interest at the expense of others.
• Moral individuals must take full responsibility for the consequences of their decisions rather than rely on excuses or rationalizations.

The Role of Reason

• Kant argues all moral actions should stem from rationality and the pursuit of reasoned decisions rather than subjective desires.
• Adults should take responsibility: Arrogance and immaturity hinder moral action.

Examples of Ethical Decision Making

• A deontologist would evaluate stealing a bus ride by asking if universal acceptance of the action would be just and moral.
• Using specific moral issues (e.g., lying to protect someone's dignity) to explore the limits and applications of Kant's ethics versus utilitarian perspective.

Challenges to Kantian Ethics in Modern Contexts

• Neo-Kantian Perspective: Questions arise in situations where lying might protect innocent life, suggesting that duties may be ranked in importance.
• Responsibility in the modern age is further complicated by technology and societal changes.

Conclusion: These ethical perspectives require critical thinking and application. Students must grapple with dilemmas through both lenses, carefully considering the implications of their choices.

• Practice moral dilemmas to prepare for discussing these theories on the exam. Use handouts to aid in studying the primary material.