Consequentialism & Utilitarianism Lecture Notes

Clearly subjective opinions: mere personal preferences (e.g.
- Ice-cream flavors
- Music tastes)
Clearly cultural practices (non-moral but vary by society)
- Smiling in photos: Americans (big smiles) vs. Romanians (neutral faces)
- Loudness & gesturing: stereotypically Italians > Americans > others
Moral opinions = require reasons that go beyond habit or culture
- Example topic: capital punishment → questions of justice, desert, cost
- Cost argument against death penalty: legal process > life-sentence cost ⇒ utilitarian flavor (harm/benefit analysis)

Umbrella family of ethical theories; shared insight: only consequences determine moral status
What does not matter intrinsically for a consequentialist:
- Intrinsic nature of the act (stealing, lying, killing may be right or wrong depending solely on outcomes)
- Agent’s intentions ("villain who accidentally helps" is morally good; "hero who bungles and harms" is morally bad)
Classic classroom example revisited: throwing a marker
- Bad when it causes pain/humiliation
- Good when it stops an attacker and secures safety
- Morally neutral/good if tossed for harmless fun that increases happiness

Core formula (act utilitarian version):
$U(\text{act}) = \sum{i=1}^{n} Bi \; - \; \sum{j=1}^{m} Hj$
Where $Bi$ = quantified benefits, $Hj$ = quantified harms
Goal: choose act with greatest net positive utility for the greatest number
Classic utilitarian triad of questions
1. What counts as a benefit? (pleasure, happiness, preference satisfaction, human flourishing, wealth, etc.)
2. Whose benefits/harms count? (self, all humans, all sentient beings)
3. How should benefits be distributed? (aggregate total vs. average per person, priority to worst-off, etc.)

	Jeremy Bentham	John Stuart Mill
Benefit metric	Pleasure / pain (quantifiable “hedons/Dolors”)	Happiness or flourishing (qualitative & higher-order pleasures)
Scope	"Each counts for one, none for more than one" (can include animals)	Same egalitarian scope

Hedonistic Ethical Egoism – maximize one’s own pleasure only
Hedonistic Utilitarianism (Bentham) – maximize total pleasure for society
Egoistic Eudaimonism (Ayn Rand–style) – maximize one’s own happiness/flourishing
Eudaimonic Utilitarianism (Mill, many modern theorists) – maximize societal happiness/flourishing

"Hedone” = pleasure (Greek)
Moral guidance still possible because rational egoist seeks long-term net pleasure (e.g., quit smoking despite short-term enjoyment; drive safely for self-preservation)

Scenario recap
1. Five cave-diving friends; tunnel floods at high tide
2. Fred climbs escape hole, gets stuck (backpack) – blocking exit
3. Dynamite is in Fred’s pack; Wilma holds detonator below
4. Option A: detonate → kill Fred, save 4
5. Option B: do nothing → water rises, kill 4, save Fred
Quick utilitarian computation (equal life-value assumed):
$V_{life}=150 \text{ util units}$
• Blow Fred: $+4\times150 -1\times150 = +450$
• No blast: $-4\times150 +1\times150 = -450$
⇒ Utilitarian verdict: detonate (net $+450$ )
Class poll: 8 “yes” vs. 7 “no” once condition added "only if Fred consents" → promise-keeping complicates pure act utilitarianism

Original thought experiment (Judith Jarvis Thomson)
- Pull lever? Save 5 / kill 1 (most say pull → utilitarian logic)
Infinite pop-culture variants (Instagram, Reddit, etc.)
- Changing known identities, self-sacrifice, etc.
Pandemic “flatten the curve” trolley graphic
- Track 1: unrestricted spread = sharp peak, hospital collapse, more deaths
- Track 2: slow spread via shutdowns = fewer simultaneous cases, health-system capacity maintained
Shows real-world policy as utilitarian trade-off (lives vs. economic & educational costs)

Legislation & Regulation: setting speed limits, pollution caps via cost-benefit analysis
Public Health: vaccine approval (rare side effects vs. mass protection)
Medical Triage: ventilator allocation, crisis standards of care (Radiolab episode cited)
Diet Ethics: animal suffering calculus → vegetarianism / veganism; debate over fish nociception
Pandemic Personal Behavior: mask-wearing, staying home = indirect utilitarian reasoning

Inept villain who intends evil but causes net good is praised by consequentialist
Well-meaning hero who accidentally causes catastrophic harm is condemned
Supermarket example: buying take-out during lockdown to keep local restaurants afloat despite personal convenience

Difficulty quantifying all variables (economic, psychological, cultural factors)
Disagreement over metric (pleasure vs. happiness vs. preference satisfaction)
Potential clash with promises, rights, or justice concerns (e.g., Fred said "don’t blow me up")

Bentham’s mummified "auto-icon" displayed at University College London (wax head)
Epicurus: ancient forerunner of hedonistic egoism (later in course)
Pop-culture references:
- TV series The Good Place: Chidi teaches trolley problem in afterlife; good intro to ethical theories
- Movies/shows: Megamind, Despicable Me (Gru), Phineas & Ferb (Dr Doofenshmirtz) as comedic “bad villains”

Consequentialism: moral value = consequences alone
Utilitarianism: maximize aggregated welfare (happiness/pleasure)
Act Utilitarianism: evaluate each discrete act by its utility
Rule Utilitarianism (teased, not elaborated): follow rules that maximize utility long-term
Hedons / Dolors: hypothetical pleasure/pain units (Bentham’s felicific calculus)
Eudaimonia: flourishing, robust happiness (Aristotelian term adopted by Mill-style utilitarians)
Auto-Icon: Bentham’s preserved body

Consequentialist logic permeates everyday policy, medicine, and personal choice
Utilitarianism provides clear action guidance but struggles with:
- Intrinsic rights, justice, promises
- Measurement problems & uncertainty
Thought experiments (spelunkers, trolley) sharpen our grasp of the theory’s power and its moral tensions