Utilitarianism Flashcards
What is the core principle of Utilitarianism?
The moral worth of an action is determined by its contribution to maximizing overall happiness or pleasure.
What does “total utility” refer to in Utilitarianism?
The greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.
What are the intrinsic values in Utilitarianism?
Pleasure and happiness are desirable and valuable, while pain and suffering are undesirable and avoidable.
Who are some of the main Utilitarian philosophers?
Jeremy Bentham, John Staurt Mill, and Henry Sidgwick.
What are the two basic motivators for humans according to utilitarianism?
Humans are motivated by pleasure and pain. They seek pleasure and avoid pain.
How does utilitarianism differ from egoism and altruism?
Egoism: prioritizes individual benefits (self-interest first).
Altruism: prioritizes others’ benefits (selfless).
Utilitarianism: values everyone’s benefits equally.
What are the three key principles of utilitarianism?
Consequentialism: Morality is based on the outcomes of actions.
Maximize the good: Actions should bring the greatest happiness to the most people.
Agent Neutrality: Everyone’s happiness counts equally, regardless of who benefits.
Can you give an example of how utilitarianism might be applied?
Deciding whether to build a new highway: Utilitarians would consider the potential benefits (reduced traffic, economic growth) and drawbacks (environmental damage, noise pollution) for everyone affected, then choose the option that creates the greatest overall good.
What are some potential criticisms of utilitarianism?
Difficult to measure happiness: Quantifying “utility” can be subjective and challenging.
Minority rights concerns: Focusing on the majority happiness might neglect the well-being of smaller groups.
Justification for harm: In extreme cases, maximizing benefit could lead to harming individuals for the greater good.
Can utilitarianism be used to justify lying or breaking promises?
It depends. Utilitarians would argue that lying or breaking promises is only acceptable if it leads to a significantly greater overall good compared to being honest or keeping a promise. However, this raises concerns about trust and long-term consequences.
What drives human actions according to utilitarianism?
While not purely selfish, humans care about the happiness of others due to their social nature and sympathy.
What makes an action morally right in utilitarianism?
An action is right if it produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.
What are the two main types of utilitarianism?
Act Utilitarian: Considers the specific consequences of each action in a particular situation.
Rule Utilitarian: Focuses on whether a general rule, if followed all the time, would create more happiness than not.
How does Act Utilitarian work?
When faced with a choice:
Identify the potential consequences of each action.
Predict which action will create the most overall happiness.
Choose the action with the greatest positive outcome.
How does Rule Utilitarian work?
When faced with a choice:
Consider if the action follows a generally beneficial rule.
Evaluate if repeatedly following this rule would create more happiness than not.
Act only if the action aligns with a good rule that should be followed always.
Can these two types of utilitarianism contradict each other?
Yes, sometimes. An action might produce the most happiness in a specific situation (Act Utilitarian) but break a generally helpful rule (Rule Utilitarian). This creates a moral dilemma.
Which type of utilitarianism is more practical?
Act Utilitarianism is easier to apply in the moment, while Rule Utilitarian provides broader guidance for consistent behaviour. Both have challenges and limitations.
What are the main challenges in measuring utility (happiness) in utilitarianism?
Subjectivity: Happiness is difficult to define and quantify objectively.
Distribution: How to weigh the happiness of different individuals or groups fairly?
Tradeoffs: How to balance positive and negative consequences for different people?
What is Motive Utilitarianism and how does it differ from other types?
Developed by Robert Merrihew Adams, it focuses on cultivating generically beneficial motives rather than specific rules or consequences. It combines aspects of Act and Rule Utilitarianism with psychological realism.
What is the “repugnant conclusion” of Total Utilitarianism?
Adding more members to a poorly-living population could be seen as increasing total happiness, even if their individual lives are miserable. This raises ethical concerns about prioritizing quantity over quality of life.
How does Negative Utilitarianism differ from traditional utilitarianism?
Instead of maximizing happiness, it emphasizes minimizing suffering and harm. It argues that great harms outweigh great goods in moral decision-making.
What is the “addition paradox” of Average Utilitarianism?
Adding a moderately happy person to a very happy society could lower the average happiness. This leads to counterintuitive implications, like potentially condoning eliminating people below the average happiness level.
What is Sentient Utilitarianism and how does it expand traditional utilitarianism?
It extends the consideration of happiness and suffering to all sentient beings, not just humans. This raises questions about how to compare the well-being of different species and individuals.
What is the core principle of “Egalitarian Justice” within a utilitarian framework?
Minimizing inequality and maximizing total societal happiness by transferring wealth from the rich to the poor.
Why is wealth redistribution seen as beneficial in this context?
The marginal utility of wealth (happiness gained per unit) is generally higher for the poor than for the rich. Therefore, transferring wealth from the rich to the poor can increase overall happiness in society.
Can you explain the concept of “marginal utility” in this context?
Imagine each unit of wealth brings less additional happiness as you gain more. For someone with little wealth, even a small amount can make a big difference in happiness (high marginal utility). Conversely, for someone with a lot, additional wealth might bring less significant improvement (low marginal utility).
Are there any potential criticisms of wealth redistribution based on utilitarian principles?
Difficult to measure happiness: Quantifying and comparing happiness levels across individuals and groups is challenging.
Loss of motivation: Concerns that reducing income inequality could discourage the wealthy from working hard and generating wealth.
Practical implementation: Designing and implementing fair and effective wealth redistribution policies can be complex and politically contentious.
Can egalitarian justice be achieved without compromising other utilitarian principles?
This is a complex question with no easy answer. Finding the right balance between maximizing total happiness and ensuring fairness and equality through wealth distribution requires careful consideration and ongoing debate.
Are there alternative approaches to promoting justice and reducing inequality within a utilitarian framework?
Yes, some utilitarians propose measures like investing in education and healthcare, expanding opportunities, and creating safety nets for the most vulnerable, aiming to increase happiness for everyone without relying solely on wealth redistribution.
What is the core focus of Narrow Egalitarianism?
It emphasizes equal distribution of goods, particularly abstract “cardinal goods” like welfare, opportunities, or resources.
How does Narrow Egalitarianism define “equality”?
It doesn’t focus on relationships between people, but on ensuring everyone has an equal amount of the specified good.
