Phil160 2/20
Recap and Introduction
Recap of previous discussions on various forms of activism, notably:
Non-factism
Factivism
Cultural activism
Each form of activism relates to principles of utility and ethical decision-making.
Utility Principle
Fundamental discussion on utility:
"You should X if and only if…"
Decision-making should be based on the utility an action brings.
Emphasis on maximizing good:
Decisions should aim to achieve the highest possible utility for the most significant number of people.
Examples of Utility in Context
Utility can manifest in various forms:
Achievements on an objective list, which may include:
Health
Wealth
Knowledge
Friendship
Importance of understanding how each of these aspects contributes to one’s overall utility.
Dilemmas in Utilitarianism
Clarification of moral dilemmas is crucial, especially regarding the people dilemma:
A dilemma involves having two or more options that are each equally appealing and unappealing.
Primary example presented:
Scenario: Preparing for an exam while a friend needs help in the hospital.
Options:
Help the friend (potentially fail the exam).
Study for the exam (neglecting the friend).
Both choices come with their respective consequences, highlighting the complexity of moral decision-making.
Another Example of Moral Dilemma
Introduced a high-stakes dilemma involving a terrorist situation:
Scenario: Two hostages vs. one stranger; choices involve:
Press a button to save the two hostages but kill one innocent person.
Refuse to comply, leading to torture and death of the hostages, while sparing the stranger.
Discusses the implications of each decision:
Pressing the button intentionally causes one person’s death (moral responsibility becomes a focal point).
Refusing leads to tortuous deaths of the two hostages.
Applying Utilitarianism to Dilemma Choices
The students analyzed options:
Those who chose option one justified their decision from a mathematical standpoint:
+2 humans saved vs. -1 for killing the stranger, suggesting a net gain.
Discussion on torture vs. death:
Torture considered as a greater evil than a swift death.
Further questioning arose around the nature of the killing:
Who is responsible for the killing?
Clarified that in pressing the button, moral responsibility might shift, as the terrorist carries out the killing.
Variations and Personal Connections in Dilemmas
Modification of the dilemma:
What if the person is someone personally connected (like a grandmother)?
Students’ responses varied more significantly when personal relationships were involved, showcasing the complexity of human emotions in dilemmas.
Discussion of personal stakes can deeply influence moral decision-making:
Responses indicate a shift in utilitarian calculations when personal connections are involved.
Additional Scenario: The Scientist Dilemma
Introduced a new scenario involving a scientist on the brink of a breakthrough in lung cancer treatment:
Choices between:
Sacrificing the scientist to save the hostages or vice versa.
Students provided rationalizations:
Some suggested the importance of the scientist's potential contribution to society justifies his survival over the immediate need to save the hostages.
The necessity of challenging the assumptions around whether the scientist alone is critical for the breakthrough.
Conclusion: Decision-Making Framework in Utilitarianism
Presented steps for applying utilitarian principles in making moral decisions:
Identify all available options, not limited to two choices.
Calculate expected utility for each option based on potential outcomes.
Weigh the importance of each outcome relative to the utility they provide.
Clarification offered that utilitarianism considers not only immediate outcomes but also long-term societal benefits.
Emphasis on the importance of reasoned expectations when making ethical decisions in complex circumstances.