WHAT IS CLUELESSNESS? DOES THIS THREATEN THE ABILITY FOR CONSEQUENTIALISM TO MAKE VERDICTS ABOUT OUR MORAL OBLIGATIONS

Question 1

PARA 1: OUTLINE CLUELESSNESS

Answer 1

∙ If you are a consequentialist, you believe actions are judged on basis of the results they produce
∙ However, how can we know the ramifications of our actions?
∙ If sometimes a supposed good action produces bad results, doesn’t this render consequentialism ‘moot’?

Question 2

PARA 2: RICHARD LENMAN’S CRITICISMS

Answer 2

∙ Lenman illustrates unforeseen causal ramifications
∙ Suppose a conquering Germanic barbarian destroys a village but leaves a singular pregnant woman alive, this woman ends up being the great ancestor of Adolf Hitler
⁃Consequently, the barbarian is responsible for the holocaust

∙ Because of the unforeseen massive causal ramifications, we cannot predict if any action will have good or bad consequences
∙ It’s impossible to even guess what these choices would lead to

Question 3

PARA 3: ISSUES WITH CONSEQUENTIALISM

Answer 3

∙ A consequentialist view of obligation would say that you are obligated to perform in a way that maximises positive consequences
∙ If you cannot know then consequentialism can offer no obligation
∙ How can you possibly make a decision?

Question 4

PARA 4: POSSIBLE CONSEQUENTIALIST RESPONSES

Answer 4

∙ While we may not be able to predict the outcomes of all of our individual actions, we can predict trends with some accuracy
⁃Can’t predict the weather but can predict the climate
⁃The Law of Large Numbers

∙ We can be aware generally that our decisions lead to positive outcomes and can recognise the patterns that actions cause
∙ We can never understand the full ramification of any action, infinite regress