Utilitarianism

Introduction to Consequentialism

  • Definition: Consequentialism posits that the morality of an action is contingent upon its outcomes or consequences. It is a doctrine that prioritizes the results of actions over the intentions behind them.

Utility and its Evaluations

  • Concept of Utility: Utility is often perceived as maximizing happiness or welfare in society, aiming to enhance the well-being of the greatest number of individuals.

    • Inclusivity: This includes all forms of happiness and suffering, whether from humans or non-human animals; every individual's welfare is counted equally.

  • Traditional Calculation of Utility:

    • The utility of an action can be calculated by summing the benefits and subtracting the harms that would arise from that action.

    • Net Utility Formula:

    • extNetUtility=extTotalBenefits−extTotalHarmsext{Net Utility} = ext{Total Benefits} - ext{Total Harms}

Hedonistic Utilitarianism

  • Definition: Hedonistic utilitarianism defines utility strictly as pleasure minus pain.

  • Intrinsic Values: It suggests that pleasure (as the only good) should be maximized, while pain (as the only bad) should be minimized.

    • Limitations Exposed: Through the thought experiment "Experience Machine" which illustrates the shortcomings of equating good solely with pleasure.

    • Arguments against:

      • Need for more than just pleasure.

      • Intuitions around value beyond mere pleasure/pain conflict.

Classic Forms of Utilitarianism

Act Utilitarianism (AU)

  • Definition: An act is deemed morally right if it maximizes utility (happiness) for each act undertaken.

  • Job of the Act Utilitarian: Evaluate individual actions to see which yields the highest happiness.

  • Case Study: Lifeguard Scenario

    • Scenario: A lifeguard has the choice of saving one person or two who are struggling in the water.

    • Conclusion: The lifeguard should save the two since it maximizes overall happiness.

Expert Challenges to Act Utilitarianism

  1. Organ Harvest Dilemma:

    • A doctor considering killing an innocent drifter to harvest his organs to save five patients.

    • Intuition: Most people reject this action, emphasizing moral boundaries.

  2. Sheriff Problem:

    • A sheriff must decide whether to frame an innocent man for murder to restore peace.

    • Intuition: Again, most reject the idea of framing an innocent person.

  3. Antivenom Case:

    • Bob has limited antivenom and must choose between saving his son or two neighbor kids.

    • Intuition: Many accept Bob's choice to prioritize his child’s life, contradicting AU principles.

Rule Utilitarianism (RU)

  • Definition: A specific action is morally justified if it conforms to a justified moral rule that generally maximizes utility when followed.

Key Aspects of Rule Utilitarianism

  1. Rule Justification: Rules are justified if their adherence maximizes overall utility compared to other potentially justified rules.

  2. Evaluation of Cases:

    • Organ Harvest: A rule against harming patients aligns with benefiting society in trust and healthcare, thus should be upheld.

    • Sheriff Scenario: Framing an innocent person violates a justified rule and would ultimately undermine community trust and societal welfare.

    • Antivenom Dilemma: Examines whether preferring loved ones (to save one’s son) can be justified under RU.

Conclusion comparing AU and RU

  • Advantages of RU: Better responses to ethical challenges, integrates moral rules seen as beneficial for long-term utility.

  • Criticism: In extreme cases (like Nazis at the door), RU can resemble deontological theory, losing the very utilitarian essence that prioritizes consequences.

Final Thoughts

  • Exam Preparation: Understanding both Act Utilitarianism and Rule Utilitarianism is essential. Each has strengths and weaknesses, revealing the complexities in ethical reasoning within consequentialism.