3.2.1 Utilitarianism - 5 markers Flashcards
Explain the difference between Bentham’s quantitative hedonistic utilitarianism and Mill’s qualitative hedonistic utilitarianism
Mill, a qualitative hedonistic utilitarian, draws a distinction between ‘high’ (i.e. pleasures that involve a cognitive component e.g. art, literature, philosophy etc. and ‘lower’ pleasures (i.e. pleasures that involve a sensual component - are shared with other animals e.g. eating or drinking).
Bentham, a quantitative hedonistic utilitarianist, argues that all pleasures are equally valuable.
Explain the difference between act and rule utilitarianism
This is a distinction between how we should maximise utility.
Act utilitarians argue that the
Mills proof
P1: Something is good if it is desirable
P2: Something is desired if it is desirable
P3: Each person desires their own happiness
C1: Therefore, each person’s happiness is desirable for that person
C2: Therefore, each person’s happiness is good for that person
C3: Therefore, the happiness of all is good for all people
P4: If something is good it is right to pursue it
C4: Therefore, it is right for everyone to pursue the happiness of all
Bentham’s utility calculus
Steps/criteria to consider when measuring/predicting utility caused by an action: (1) intensity
and (2) duration of the sensation, (3) certainty that the sensation will occur, (4) propinquity (proximity of the sensation in time), (5) fecundity (likelihood of the sensation being followed by more of the same kind), (6) purity (likelihood of the sensation not being followed by the opposite sensation), and (7) extent (the amount of people whose sensations are affected by the action).
Issues, including: whether pleasure is the only good (Nozick’s experience machine) cass
Utilitarians claim that an action is morally right, if and only if, it maximises utility, where utility is understood as pleasure/absence of pain. Critics will attack this claim by arguing that pleasure is not the only good. Critics illustrate this problem with Nozick’s experience machine is a thought experiment in which people can choose to go in a machine that could give them any experience you might desire. If as a matter of fact all we desire is pleasure, then we would have no good reason not to plug into the experience machine. However, people do have good reasons not to plug into it, such as, we want to be connected to reality, we want to share reality with other people and to affect them, we want to change reality, we care about what it actually the case, not just how they seem. Therefore, the hedonistic claim that as a matter of fact all we desire is happiness is not true.
Issues, including: issues around partiality
Utilitarianism claims that an act is morally right if and only if doing it produces at least as much utility as any other act that could be performed.
Particular people, i.e. those that we have a relationship with, have greater moral importance than others. This might involve arguing that the very possibility of, e.g, “friendship”, requires that the friends prioritise each other over others.
There will always be possible scenarios where the utilitarian calculation would go against these strong moral intuitions that we have about the value of certain relationships.
e.g.
Therefore, utilitarianism ignores the moral status/importance of particular relationships (family/friendship) we may have with others, and, indeed, ignores the special duty we may have to ourselves.
Issues, including: whether utilitarianism ignores both the moral integrity and intentions of the individual
Utilitarianism claims that an action is morally right if and only if it maximises utility. Bernard Williams attacks this claim arguing that utilitarianism ignores both the moral integrity and intentions of the individual. He illustrates the example of a group of 20 innocent South America and a Captain who tells George (a crew member) to kill one and the 19 will be spared - otherwise the 20 will all be killed. If an action is morally right if and only if it maxmises utility, then George should kill the one innocent South American to save the 19. However, Williams argues that this demand George to act without integrity, abandoning or ignoring their identity as decision-makers.
Issues, including: problems with calculation (including which being to involve)
Utilitarians claim that an action is morally right, if an only if it, maximises utility. Critics may attack this claim by arguing
Issues with carrying out the calculating/predicting required for determining what to do.
There may be difficulties relating to which beings are included in the calculation (just humans? animals also?).
If the happiness of every being that can feel pleasure or pain, or can have preferences that are satisfied or not, makes a difference to whether an action is morally right or not, the problem of calculation is intensified. If it is difficult to compare the happiness of different people, it is much more difficult to compare the happiness of a person with that of, say, a pig or a bird. But this will be relevant if we ask whether we should eat meat or whether we should destroy wild habitats to make new farms to grow crops for people.
Issues, including: fairness and individual liberty/rights (including the risk of the tyranny of the majority)
Utilitarians claims that an action is morally right, if and only if, it maximises utility. Critics may attack this claim by arguing that utilitarianism ignores fairness and individual liberty/rights. Critics illustrate this problem with the example of the ‘tyranny of the majority’: where a majority group gains pleasure from oppressing a minority group. If utilitarianism is true then maximising utility requires tyranny of the majority. However, critics argue that ignores that this minority group should be treated fairly and that they have individual liberties/rights.
