Download Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism
Jeremy Bentham’s Utilitarianism
Bentham’s major work: The Principles of
Morals and Legislation (1789)
 divided into three sections:
1. Motivation of human beings and
the concept of good and bad
“Nature has placed mankind
under the governance of two
sovereign masters, pain and
pleasure. It is for them alone
to point out what we shall do,
as well as to determine what
we shall do.”
2. Principle of Utility – The greatest good for the greatest number.
The most useful course of action is
 trying to maximise pleasure and minimize pain.
 In a given situation, one must examine the consequential pain/pleasure
resultant for all concerned.
3. Hedonic Calculus – The Hedonic Calculus weighs up the pain and pleasure
generated by the available moral actions to find the best option. It considers
several factors:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
Intensity
Duration
Certainty or uncertainty
Nearness or remoteness
Consequences
Purity
Extent
If the probable pain of an action out weighs its pleasure then Bentham says that it is
morally wrong.
Weaknesses of Bentham’s utilitarianism




Swine Ethic: If 10 rapists were to rape the same woman, then using the Hedonic
Calculus, their pleasure could outweigh the woman’s pain. Therefore, it would become
justifiable. This is called the Swine Ethic.
Measurement: Consequences are not measurable because we do not know how far the
consequences will reach. When do we stop?
Minorities: There is no protection for the minorities.
Pig Philosophy: Bentham counts all pleasures as equal – e.g. couch potato or Mozart.
AS Ethics 1
1
Utilitarianism
John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism
Mill preferred quality/happiness to Bentham’s quantity/pleasure
based Utilitarianism:
 To Mill, Bentham’s focus of morality on pleasure alone
seemed rather base.
 Mill replaced pleasure with ‘happiness’: “the greatest
happiness for the greatest number” – so he moved away
from mere quantity to the quality of happiness as well.
 Mill defined happiness
as something which is
cultural and spiritual
rather than just
physical and
distinguished between
lower pleasures and
higher pleasures. He
famously wrote:
 Although he believed that the wellbeing of the individual was of primary concern,
happiness is best achieved when it is subject to the rules that protect the common
good.
Weaknesses of Mill’s utilitarianism
•
Sidgewick – “In practice it is hard to distinguish between higher and lower
pleasures.” This is due to the subjectivity of “pleasure”
•
WD Ross – “Single-factor” moral theories don’t work because life is too complex.
We have “prima facie” duties: i.e. who would I save – my son or a man with the
cure to AIDS? – My son because my prima facie duty is to him.
•
RM Hare – you would still have to tell the truth to a mad axe man. It would still
be possible to justify slavery – minority rights not protected.
Comparing Bentham and Mill
Bentham
Mill
“the greatest good [pleasure] for the
“the greatest happiness for the
greatest number”
greatest number”
Focussed on the individual alone
We should protect the common good
Hedonic Calculus (quantitative pleasure)
Higher/lower pleasures (qualitative)
Atheistic
AS Ethics 1
2
Utilitarianism
Act Utilitarianism
Rule Utilitarianism
Act utilitarianism uses the outcome
of an action to assess whether it is
right or wrong. Thus, there are no
necessary moral rules except one,
that we should always seek the
greatest happiness for the greatest
number in all situations.
Rule utilitarians believe that rules should be
formed using utilitarian principles for the
benefit of society. Strong utilitarians believe
that these derived rules should never be
disobeyed. However, weak utilitarians say
that although there should be generally
accepted rules or guidelines, they should not
always be adhered to indefinitely.
Act utilitarianism is linked to
Bentham’s form of utilitarianism.
Rule utilitarianism is commonly linked with Mill.
Weakness of Act utilitarianism





Weakness of rule utilitarianism
Difficult to predict consequences
No defence for the minorities
Difficulty in defining pleasure
There is potential to justify any act
It is impractical to say that we
should calculate the morality of
each choice



Summary



Summary
Teleological – it is aiming towards a
maximisation of pleasure for the majority.
It has an end aim or goal.
Relative – no notion of absolute
right/wrong, no external source of truth.
Nothing in itself is right or wrong.
Consequential – the consequences of an act
alone determine its rightness/wrongness.
Strengths of Utilitarianism
 Supports the notion that human
wellbeing is generally good
 Supports Jesus’ call to treat
others as you would have them
treat you
 Consequences affect life, not
motives
 Encourages democracy
AS Ethics 1
It is difficult to predict the
consequences
No defence for the minorities
Difficulty in defining what
constitutes happiness



Deontological – rules take priority.
Relative – what is right/wrong is
established as the maximisation of pleasure
for the particular community/society which
it operates within.
Consequential – the overall consequences
determine its rightness/wrongness.
Weaknesses of Utilitarianism
 Difficult to predict consequences
 Does not protect the minorities
 The theory disregards motivation and
goodwill
 Says that the majority is always right (e.g.
Nazis in WWII)
 The single criterion for morality is far too
simplistic. Morality cannot rely on pleasure
and happiness alone – life is too complex.
3
Utilitarianism
Appendix: Utilitarianism
Utilitarianism is a normative ethical theory that places the locus of right and wrong
solely on the outcomes (consequences) of choosing one action/policy over other
actions/policies. As such, it moves beyond the scope of one's own interests and takes
into account the interests of others.
Bentham's Principle of Utility:
(1) Recognizes the fundamental role of pain and pleasure in human life,
(2) approves or disapproves of an action on the basis of the amount of pain or pleasure brought about i.e,
consequences,
(3) equates good with pleasure and evil with pain, and
(4) asserts that pleasure and pain are capable of quantification (and hence 'measure').
In measuring pleasure and pain, Bentham introduces the following criteria: INTENSITY,
DURATION, CERTAINTY (or UNCERTAINTY), and its NEARNESS (or FARNESS). He also includes its
"fecundity" (will more of the same follow?) and its "purity" (its pleasure won't be followed by pain & vice
versa). In considering actions that affect numbers of people, we must also account for its EXTENT.
John Stuart Mill adjusted the more hedonistic tendencies in Bentham's philosophy by
emphasizing (1) It is not the quantity of pleasure, but the quality of happiness that is central to
utilitarianism, (2) the calculus is unreasonable -- qualities cannot be quantified (there is a distinction
between 'higher' and 'lower' pleasures), and (3) utilitarianism refers to "the Greatest Happiness
Principle" -- it seeks to promote the capability of achieving happiness (higher pleasures) for the most
amount of people (this is its "extent").
Act and Rule Utilitarianism
We can apply the principle of utility to either PARTICULAR ACTIONS or GENERAL
RULES. The former is called "act-utilitarianism" and the latter is called "ruleutilitarianism."
Act-utilitarianism -- The principle of utility is applied directly to each alternative act in
a situation of choice. The right act is then defined as the one which brings about the
best results (or the least amount of bad results).
• Criticisms of this view point to the difficulty of attaining a full knowledge and
certainly of the consequences of our actions.
• It is possible to justify immoral acts using AU: Suppose you could end a regional
war by torturing children whose fathers are enemy soliders, thus revealing the
hide outs of the fathers.
Rule-utilitarianism -- The principle of utility is used to determine the validity of rules
of conduct (moral principles). A rule like promise-keeping is established by looking at
the consequences of a world in which people broke promises at will and a world in which
promises were binding. Right and wrong are then defined as following or breaking those
rules.
• Some criticisms of this position point out that if the Rules take into account
more and more exceptions, RU collapses into AU.
• More genearl criticisms of this view argue that it is possible to generate "unjust
rules" according to the principle of utility. For example, slavery in Greece might
be right if it led to an overall achievement of cultivated happiness at the expense
of some mistreated individuals.
AS Ethics 1
4
Utilitarianism