3.2.1 Utilitarianism Flashcards
What are normative ethical theories?
‘Normative ethics’ is the branch of philosophy that discusses theories of how to live and what we should do. Utilitarianism is one of these theories.
What is utilility
Jeremy Bentham, the founding father of utilitarianism, defined utility as the tendency of something to produce benefit, advantage, good or happiness or to prevent mischief, pain, evil or unhappiness.
What are the three terms that define utilitarianism?
- Act consequentialism
- Hedonism
- Equality.
What is act consequentialism?
Actions are morally right or wrong depending on their consequences and nothing else. An act is right if it maximises what is good.
What is hedonism?
The only thing that is good is happiness, understood as pleasure and the absence of pain. This is ‘hedonism’
What is equality? (in relation to utilitarianism)
No one’s happiness counts more than anyone else’s.
hedonistic act utilitarianism
Our actions are morally right if they bring about the greatest happiness.
(leads to more happiness than any other possible happiness)
Who is considered the first act utilitarian and what did he defend?
Jeremy Bentham defended the principle of utility/greatest happiness principle.
“that principle….”
What is the principle of utility/greatest happiness principle?
‘that principle which approves or disapproves of every action whatsoever, according to the tendency which it appears to have augmented or diminished the happiness of the party whose interest is in question.’
+ so Bentham claims that in judging actions to be morally right or wrong, we should take into account only the TOTAL amount of happiness that the action may produce.
What is the hedonic/felicific calculus?
An algorithm-like process whereby Betham argued we can measure the pleasure and pains of an action.
Explain how the hedonic calculus works
considers 7 factors:
intensity, duration, certainty, fecundity, propinquity, purity and extent
+ greatest utility principle = we should only consider this result in judging the morality of an action
What is an objection to utilitarianism which Mill responds to in his theory of qualitative hedonistic utilitarianism ?
Utilitarianism values only pleasure and does not recognise the ‘higher’ things in life or the dignity of human beings.
What does JS Mill agree with Bentham about?
- that people’s moral apporval and dissaproval of an action is strongly influenced by its affect on their happiness; the greatest happiness principle plays a significant role in formng moral beliefs
- that happiness is pleasure and the absence of pain
What does JS Mill disagree with Bentham about?
Bentham says in ‘The Rationale of Reward’,1830, that ‘the game of pushpin is of equal value with the arts and sciences of music and poetry’
Mill rejects the view that pleasures and pains are all equally valuable.
How does JS Mill divide pleasures?
Into ‘higher’ and ‘lower’ pleasures.
He argues some pleasures are more valuable and important to human happiness given the types of creatures we are and what we are capable of.
What does Mill say ‘higher’ pleasures are?
Mill argues that, as long as our physical needs are met, people will prefer the pleasures of thought feeling and imagination to the pleasures of the body and the senses, even though our higher capacities also mean we can experience terrible pain and dissatisfaction.
What does Mill say in response to the objection that utilitarianism values only pleasure?
valuing only pleasure is a ‘doctrine worthy only of swine’
Why does Mill say ‘it is better to be a human dissatisfied than a pig satissfied’?
Humans can expereince deep personal relationshops, art and creative thought, pigs cannot. Humans can expereince horrible pain as a result but we don’t take the possibility of pain as a reason to live as a well-looked-after pig instead of a human.
Mill argues this preference derives from our sense of dinity which is an essential part of our happiness.
Objection to Mill’s theory that people prefer higher pleasures
People do not really persue the ‘higher’ pleasures of thought, feeling and imagination instead of the ‘lower’ pleasures realted to the body and senses.
Mills response to the objection that people do not persue higher pleasures
-He argues there is a difference between higher pleasures and action
- we can choose what we know to be less good whether from weakness or laziness and still recognise that our choice was less valuable
- appreciating higher demanding so we may seek lower pleasures simpy because they are more readily available to us
What are the two stages of Mill’s proof of utilitarianism?
Stage 1: happiness is good
Stage 2: only happiness is good
Explain Stage 1 of Mill’s proof: happiness is good
- What is good is what we should aim at in our lives- what is good is an end. What we should aim at is what’s desirable.
- What is good, is what’s desirable as an end
- we can’t deduce (prrove) was is good (what’s desirable as an end)
- so we myst appeal to evidence
- the only evidence that something is visible is if people can see it…
- Mill argues that the only proof that something is desirable is that people actually desire it.
- It is a fact that happiness is a good, because all people desire their own happiness.
(Thus, it is clear that happiness is at least one end, and one criterion, of morality.) - if the individual seeks happinessm, the general happiness is sought by the aggregate of all people.
Explain the fallacy of equivocation critique of Mills proof
G.E Moore says Mill equivocates on the word desirable and conflates two meanings:
- worthy of being desired (anything desired in this case is good)
- capable of being desired (what people desire)
What people actually desire is not the same as what is worthy of desire-people want all sorts of rubbish! He has (falsely) assumed what people desire is good.
Explain the fallacy of composition critique of Mills proof
Mill seems to be saying that because each person desires their own happiness that everybody desire’s everybody’s happiness. (general happiness)
Mill’s response to the fallacy of equivocation
When Mill says ‘happiness is good’ he’s talking about ‘higher pleasures not chocolate or cocaine etc… he means the higher pleasures which are capable and worthy.
It’s a misinterpretation of what he said.
Mill’s response to the fallacy of composition
- At no point does Mill feel he needs to defemd the idea of impartiality in ethics (fairness)
- he simply assumes that ethics is concerned with what is good (happiness) in general
- he is not trying to infer that we ought to care for others happiness, but having argued that happiness is good, it follows that ethics is impartial that we should be concerned with the general happiness
It’s a misinterpretation of what he said.
Explain Stage 2 of Mill’s proof: only happiness is good
Happiness has many ingredients such as truth, freedom and each ingredient is desirable in itself, but they are not external means but constitutive means to the end that is happiness.
Name the issues with act utilitarianism
-problems with the calculation
-tyranny of majority
-ignores intentions
-partiality
(higher and lower pelasure & valuing other stuff)
What are the three problems presented with trying to use the felicific calculus?
First, how do you quantify each of the seven variables? For example, how do you measure the intensity of pleasure? Are we supposed to hook everyone up to brain scanners?!
Second, how do you compare these seven variables against each other? For example, how do you decide between, say, a longer-lasting dull pleasure and a short-lived but more intense pleasure?
Finally, which beings do we include in this calculation? Animals can feel pleasures and pains too, so are we supposed to include them in our calculation? If so, is a dog’s pain equal to a human being’s? What about a mouse? Or a spider?
just not practical!
Betham’s response to problems with the calculation
Bentham says the felicific calculus is more a general guide to be “kept in view” rather than something that has to be worked out precisely every time we act
What does Mill say about the hedonic calculus
It is still too complicated for everyday practical use. But he says we actually don’t have to because people have automatically over time through trial and error worked out which actions tend to produce happiness. This is what inherited moral rules are eg: dont lie and dont steal, Mill calls these secondary principles.
When does Mill say we should attempt to calculate happiness?
It is only in cases of conflict between secondary principles (eg by telling the truth you ghave to break a promise) that we need to apply the greatest happiness principlease (what is the total amount of happiness) to an action. We shouldn’t attempt to calculate happiness unless we have such a conflict.
Explain Mill’s primary and secondary principles.
‘Utility is the ultimate source of moral obligations’. This ‘first principle’ can be appealed to if there are conflicting ‘secondary principles’ which are inherited moral rules which have been worked out over time through trial and error identifying which actions lead to the greatest happiness. (rules).
