scoresvideos
Ethics
Table of Contents
Unit 2 Overview: Consequentialism and Utilitarianism
2.1 Foundations of Consequentialism
2.2 Utilitarianism: Classical and Modern Approaches
2.3 Critiques and Limitations of Consequentialist Ethics

🥸ethics review

2.2 Utilitarianism: Classical and Modern Approaches

Citation:

Utilitarianism is a moral theory that judges actions based on their consequences. It aims to maximize overall well-being for all affected individuals, including humans, animals, and future generations. This approach focuses on outcomes rather than the intrinsic nature of actions.

Classical utilitarianism, developed by Bentham and Mill, emphasized quantifying happiness. Modern approaches recognize challenges in precise measurement and address issues like animal welfare and future generations. These developments have expanded and refined utilitarian thinking.

Utilitarianism: Core Tenets and Development

Central Principles of Utilitarianism

  • Utilitarianism holds that the most ethical action is the one that maximizes overall "utility" or well-being for all affected individuals (humans, animals, future generations)
  • As a consequentialist theory, utilitarianism focuses on outcomes of actions rather than the intrinsic nature of the acts themselves
  • Utilitarians argue we have an impartial obligation to consider the interests of all sentient beings and weigh them equally when making moral decisions
  • Utilitarianism is a welfarist theory concerned with improving the welfare or well-being of individuals and society as a whole

Historical Evolution of Utilitarian Thought

  • Classical utilitarianism was developed by 18th and 19th century philosophers Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill
  • Bentham proposed the "greatest happiness principle" stating that actions are right insofar as they promote overall happiness (pleasure) and minimize overall pain
  • Bentham believed happiness could be quantified and compared across individuals using the "felicific calculus"
  • Mill distinguished between "higher" intellectual pleasures and "lower" sensual pleasures, considering the former more valuable
  • Modern utilitarian thinkers like Peter Singer have expanded utilitarian consideration to include animal welfare and the interests of future generations

Classical vs Modern Utilitarianism

Comparing Classical and Modern Approaches

  • Classical utilitarianism emphasized quantifying and maximizing overall utility, while modern approaches recognize the difficulty of precise quantification and interpersonal comparisons
  • Classical utilitarians treated increasing happiness and reducing suffering as symmetrical, while some modern utilitarians prioritize reducing suffering due to an alleged asymmetry between the two
  • Modern two-level utilitarianism (R.M. Hare) uses rule utilitarianism for everyday choices but act utilitarianism for novel moral dilemmas, addressing some limitations of pure act utilitarianism
  • Modern population ethics and theories of personal identity (Derek Parfit) complicate classical utilitarian notions of utility tied to distinct, continuous individuals

Challenges Facing Modern Utilitarianism

  • Infinitarian paralysis: If there are infinite potential individuals, it becomes unclear how to make principled comparisons between outcomes
  • Hard-to-quantify values: Modern utilitarians recognize that some important values (beauty, autonomy, fairness) are difficult to precisely measure and factor into calculations
  • Demandingness objection: Utilitarianism may require extremely demanding sacrifices from individuals for the greater good, conflicting with common-sense morality
  • Future generations: Accounting for the interests of vast numbers of potential future people is a major challenge for modern utilitarianism
  • Repugnant conclusion: Utilitarian reasoning can lead to the counterintuitive conclusion that a vast population with lives barely worth living is better than a smaller, thriving population

Implications of Utilitarianism for Decision-Making

Utilitarianism and Individual Ethics

  • Utilitarianism provides guidance for individual ethical decisions by considering the outcomes for all affected parties, not just the individual
  • It requires impartially weighing the costs and benefits of our actions on overall well-being, even if that means personal sacrifices
  • In situations with competing individual interests, utilitarianism instructs us to choose the action that results in the greatest aggregate positive outcome
  • However, utilitarianism may sometimes endorse violating individual rights if doing so leads to much better consequences overall

Utilitarianism and Social Policy

  • For broader social and political decisions, utilitarianism implies policies should be chosen to maximize overall societal welfare
  • This could justify measures like progressive taxation, wealth redistribution, and limits on property rights for the greater good
  • Utilitarian thinking is often applied to assess the ethics of new technologies (AI, genetic engineering), research, and public health initiatives in terms of their aggregate costs and benefits
  • Utilitarianism struggles with whether to weigh everyone's welfare equally or prioritize improving the lot of the worse off
  • Critics argue utilitarianism fails to respect individual rights, fairness, and justice by focusing only on overall welfare

Measuring and Comparing Utility

Challenges in Quantifying Well-Being

  • Interpersonal comparisons of utility are not objectively measurable the way physical properties like mass are
  • Individuals' self-reports of their mental states and preferences can be unreliable and biased
  • People often lack stable, consistent, and well-defined utility functions, making their welfare hard to pin down
  • Qualitative differences in happiness (simple contentment vs complex fulfillment) complicate comparisons
  • Utility monsters and zombies: hypothetical entities with such extreme utility functions that utilitarian calculus leads to counterintuitive conclusions (enslaving everyone to benefit the monster)

Aggregating Utility and Distributional Concerns

  • Utilitarianism requires aggregating utility across individuals to compare outcomes, but how exactly to do this is contentious
  • Assuming everyone's utility is weighted equally can lead to unfair or inequitable results (benefiting larger groups at the expense of smaller ones)
  • Prioritarianism argues we should give more weight to improving the welfare of worse-off individuals
  • Egalitarian views propose ensuring a fair distribution of welfare, not just maximizing the sum total
  • Utilitarians argue for simply weighing costs and benefits as best we can rather than imposing extraneous distributional constraints
  • Dealing with uncertainty: utilitarians must rely on expected value and our best efforts to accurately predict consequences

Key Terms to Review (22)

Repugnant Conclusion: The repugnant conclusion is a philosophical notion in utilitarianism that suggests if a large population of people living barely bearable lives can be considered better than a smaller population living very happy lives, then it challenges our intuitions about well-being and value. This idea brings to light the potential implications of utilitarian thought, questioning how happiness and suffering should be weighed when making ethical decisions. The conclusion leads to debates around the moral acceptability of maximizing overall happiness at the cost of individual suffering.
Modern two-level utilitarianism: Modern two-level utilitarianism is an ethical theory that combines elements of act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism, proposing that moral agents should follow rules that generally promote the greatest happiness but also have the flexibility to assess individual actions when circumstances demand. This approach recognizes the complexity of moral decision-making and the need for practical guidelines while allowing for exceptions when adhering strictly to rules may lead to suboptimal outcomes.
Moral luck: Moral luck refers to the phenomenon where the moral judgment of an individual is influenced by factors beyond their control, specifically the outcomes of their actions. This concept challenges traditional views of moral responsibility, suggesting that people may be judged differently based on circumstances and results rather than just intentions or character. This idea is particularly relevant in discussions about ethical theories that prioritize consequences over intentions.
Negative utilitarianism: Negative utilitarianism is a moral theory that prioritizes the reduction of suffering over the maximization of happiness. Unlike classical utilitarianism, which seeks to maximize overall utility or happiness, negative utilitarianism focuses specifically on minimizing harm and preventing negative experiences. This approach highlights the importance of alleviating pain and suffering as the primary ethical imperative.
Infinitarian paralysis: Infinitarian paralysis refers to a state where an individual feels overwhelmed by the infinite possibilities and moral obligations of decision-making, particularly in the context of utilitarianism. This phenomenon can lead to inaction or indecisiveness, as one grapples with the ethical implications of various choices that could maximize overall happiness. In the realm of utilitarianism, this paralysis highlights the challenges faced by individuals when trying to evaluate actions based on their consequences for the greater good.
Enlightenment Philosophy: Enlightenment philosophy refers to the intellectual movement that emerged in Europe during the late 17th and 18th centuries, emphasizing reason, individualism, and skepticism of traditional authority. This movement laid the groundwork for modern political thought and ethical theories, including utilitarianism, by advocating for a rational approach to ethics and morality, challenging established norms, and promoting the idea that human beings can improve their society through reasoned deliberation.
Hard-to-quantify values: Hard-to-quantify values refer to the subjective and often intangible benefits or costs that are difficult to measure in numerical terms. In the context of utilitarianism, especially classical and modern approaches, these values challenge the idea of calculating overall happiness or utility, as they encompass emotional, cultural, and ethical aspects that do not lend themselves easily to quantification. This complexity complicates decision-making processes, as utilitarian calculations may overlook significant factors that contribute to overall well-being.
Demandingness objection: The demandingness objection is a critique of ethical theories, particularly utilitarianism, which argues that these theories require individuals to make excessively high moral demands on themselves. This objection posits that utilitarianism often asks people to prioritize the greater good over personal interests and relationships, leading to potentially unreasonable expectations for moral behavior.
Utility Monsters: Utility monsters are hypothetical beings that derive disproportionately high levels of utility from resources compared to others, challenging the fairness of utilitarianism. This concept raises important questions about how utilitarian principles can lead to morally questionable outcomes, especially when the needs of a utility monster can outweigh the needs of many other individuals, leading to ethical dilemmas in resource allocation and welfare considerations.
Preference utilitarianism: Preference utilitarianism is a form of utilitarianism that focuses on maximizing the satisfaction of individual preferences rather than simply maximizing overall happiness or pleasure. This approach recognizes that individuals have different desires and values, and aims to create outcomes that respect and promote these preferences as a measure of utility.
19th-century ethics: 19th-century ethics refers to the moral theories and philosophical ideas that emerged during the 1800s, significantly influencing modern ethical thought. This era is marked by the development of utilitarianism, particularly through thinkers like Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, who emphasized the importance of outcomes and the greatest happiness principle in moral decision-making. Additionally, this period witnessed debates surrounding individual rights, social justice, and the responsibilities of individuals within society.
Policy formulation: Policy formulation is the process of developing strategies and plans to address specific issues or problems through structured decision-making. This process involves analyzing data, evaluating options, and considering ethical implications to create effective policies that promote the greatest good. In the context of utilitarianism, both classical and modern approaches emphasize evaluating the consequences of various actions to determine which policy maximizes overall happiness or utility.
Jeremy Bentham: Jeremy Bentham was an English philosopher and social reformer known for founding the doctrine of utilitarianism, which advocates for actions that maximize happiness and well-being for the greatest number of people. His ideas on moral philosophy emphasize the consequences of actions and the importance of evaluating them based on their utility, thus linking directly to both classical and modern approaches to utilitarianism.
Disutility: Disutility refers to the negative satisfaction or the harmful effects experienced as a result of consuming a good or service. In the context of moral philosophy, particularly within utilitarianism, disutility plays a critical role as it reflects the detrimental consequences that certain actions or policies may produce for individuals or society. Understanding disutility helps in evaluating the overall utility of an action by considering both positive and negative outcomes.
Cost-Benefit Analysis: Cost-benefit analysis is a systematic approach used to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of alternatives in order to determine the best option based on their costs and benefits. This method helps in making informed decisions by quantifying the potential impacts of different choices, thus playing a crucial role in ethical leadership, problem-solving strategies, utilitarianism, and consequentialism.
Felicific calculus: Felicific calculus is a method used in utilitarianism to quantify the happiness or pleasure produced by an action, allowing for a comparison of its overall utility. This concept helps assess the moral worth of actions based on their consequences, specifically focusing on the net pleasure or pain generated. The calculation takes into account factors such as intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity, fecundity, purity, and extent to determine which action will lead to the greatest good for the greatest number.
Act utilitarianism: Act utilitarianism is a moral theory that suggests the rightness or wrongness of an action is determined by its consequences, specifically the extent to which it promotes overall happiness or reduces suffering. This approach evaluates each individual action based on the amount of good it produces, emphasizing that the best action is the one that maximizes utility for the greatest number of people. This concept is closely related to broader utilitarian theories and integrates well with various ethical discussions.
Rule utilitarianism: Rule utilitarianism is a moral theory that evaluates the ethicality of actions based on the rules that, if generally followed, would lead to the greatest good for the greatest number of people. This approach differs from act utilitarianism, which assesses individual actions based on their specific consequences. By emphasizing adherence to rules that promote overall well-being, rule utilitarianism aims to create a more stable and predictable moral framework.
Trolley problem: The trolley problem is a moral dilemma that involves a choice between two unfavorable outcomes, typically illustrated by a scenario where a person must decide whether to pull a lever to divert a runaway trolley onto a track where it will kill one person instead of five. This thought experiment highlights the complexities of ethical decision-making and the conflicts between utilitarianism and deontological ethics.
John Stuart Mill: John Stuart Mill was a 19th-century British philosopher and political economist best known for his contributions to utilitarianism and liberal thought. His work emphasizes the importance of individual liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the greatest happiness principle, which connects directly to the evaluation of moral dilemmas and ethical decision-making.
Utility: Utility refers to the overall happiness or satisfaction that an action or decision brings to individuals. It serves as a fundamental concept in ethical theories that evaluate the consequences of actions, focusing on maximizing benefits for the greatest number of people. This notion is key to understanding different moral frameworks, especially those that prioritize outcomes over intentions.
Greatest happiness principle: The greatest happiness principle is a foundational concept in utilitarianism that posits the best action is the one that maximizes overall happiness or pleasure while minimizing suffering. This principle connects ethical decision-making to the outcomes of actions, emphasizing that the moral worth of an action is determined by its contribution to the well-being of all affected individuals.