Pleasure Cannot Be Measured, And Therefore Utilitarianism Cannot Give Useful Moral Guidance

Question 1

Intro dc

Answer 1

D - utilitarianism = An ethical theory that judges the morality of actions based on their ability to maximise happiness or pleasure
- pleasure - ‘the only good’ Bentham
C - this essay will disagree as Benthams hedonic calculus gives us a way to quantify pleasure and neurological developments allow us to collect empirical data to measure pleasure

Question 2

Pe 1

Answer 2

First reason to support arg is Benthams hedonic calculus allows us to apply utilitarianism to specific situations and gives us a way to quantify pleasure by considering 7 factors : duration, certainty, purity, extent, fecundity, propinquity, intensity can measure how much pleasure and pain an action will bring + use it base moral decision making off. Gives a structured method to provide a clear framework of measuring + applying pleasure

Question 3

A 1

Answer 3

• is logical and easy to use and allows us to quantify pleasure and use utilitarianism to make practical decisions
• think through action as a whole making utilitarianism thorough and therefore makes ut useful at giving moral guidance

Question 4

C 1

Answer 4

Arg could be refuted by the arg that pleasure can’t be simplified to a mathematical formula as pleasure and pain are subjective (we enjoy diff things and have diff pain thresholds/tolerances. Therefore hedonic calculus is too basic as doesn’t take into account different types of pleasures or different cultures and cultural contexts

Question 5

E 1

Answer 5

Fails as
- mills rule ut distinguishes between higher pleasures (intellectual pleasure e.g reading Shakespeare) and lower pleasures (pleasures of the body eg eating) and so arg that pleasure is can’t be considered as equal is futile as mill addresses this and brings in pleasures with different importance
- apply hedonic calculus to individual situations so allows pleasure to be applied to different things in diff contexts

Question 6

Pe 2

Answer 6

The second reason to agree with arg is neurological developments allow us to see how parts of the brain react to pleasure - can measure brain activity amd hormonal responses to things to measure pleasure. Can use this empirical data to measure pleasure + remove its subjectivity meaning pleasure can be used as a measured concept to apply to moral decisions

Question 7

A 2

Answer 7

• scientific data is rigoursly tested so can’t dispute that it is not true meaning and that pleasure can’t be measured
• produces exact values, removing any ambiguity of how much pleasure an action will cause

Question 8

C 2

Answer 8

This arg could be refuted by the arg that whilst we can measure pleasure we can’t measure goodness. Moores open question arg raises the possibility that even if we could measure pleasure we are not necessarily measuring goodness. Moores says to believe we are is a naturalistic fallacy as it is a mistake to attempt Tom define good in terms of something that is measurable (pleasure = the only good (b)). And the question is pleasure really good is an open question suggesting pleasure and goodness are not synonymous

Question 9

E 2

Answer 9

• focus on whether pleasure is good is not as important instead utilitarianism focus on maximising pleasure is more important as improves well beings (more practical)
• focus too much on on lack of agreement on ethical frameworks rather than whether pleasure can be measured or not