Utilitarianism

• Teleological ethics - focusing on the consequences of our actions
• A humans utility is to experience pleasure. (Bentham)
• Hedonism


  Pursuit of pleasure
• Hedonic calculus 


  Weigh up the pleasure & pain of a situation
• What should you measure for the hedonic calculus

  • Intensity (strength)
  • Duration (length)
  • Certainty (likeliness of feeling pleasure)
  • Propinquity (when will the pleasure arrive)
  • Fecundity (will it cause further pleasure)
  • Purity (how free from pain)
  • Extent (how many people effected)
• Bentham's context & life

  Went to oxford university

  • grew up conservative
  • lived through industrial revolution
  • started political reform
• Utility principle 


  Utilitarianism
• Qualitative hedonic calculus 


  More complex pleasures are more important than simple pleasures such as eating which even a pig could enjoy
• Mill's test


  1. Must be chosen despite purity/quantity
  2. Judges must be competent
  3. Majority rules
• Mill wrote two books called?

  Utilitarianism & liberty

  
  

  In chapter 2 of Utilitarianism, Mill went against Bentham's ideas on pleasure
• Act utilitarianism 


  When choosing an action, using the utility principle, choose the act that will bring the most pleasure to the most people
• Strong rule utilitarianism 


  Follow the rules developed by the utility principle in all circumstances
• Weak rule utilitarianism 


  Rules most of the time followed but occasionally there may be exceptions
• Rule utilitarianism is associated with Mill , Act with Bentham
• Two tier utilitarianism 


  1. Generally go with rule utilitarianism
  2. If you are in a serious moral dilemma you should think like an act utilitarian
• Nozick's pleasure machine 


  Simulation where all you experience is pleasure. no pain. Once you enter you cannot leave the simulation, you can experience anything you might desire. Once you enter the simulation, you do not have any knowledge it is not reality.

  
  

  The majority of people would not go in this machine, this poses a problem for Bentham as it shows that pleasure is not the only thing people desire, but reality as well
• The pleasure machine 2.0

  Virtual reality, as real as the current world , you can get anything you want. You will forget you're in a simulation and everything that happens in the vr world is connected to your world. Also, you can experience pain e.g: a sad book if you wish
• Arguably, Utilitarianism ignores the intentions of individuals and solely focuses on the consequences. Intentions are ignored, true motives may never be known

  e.g: two people visit their grandparents weekly

  • The first person visits because they love and care for them
  • The second, visits in order to gain a higher inheritance

  The consequences are the same for the grandparents , does this mean they are both moral acts?
• Utilitarians argue that the intentions of individuals are in fact acknowledged and you are praised or blamed for your intentions
• Arguably utilitarianism ignores the moral integrity of the individual , people have their own beliefs on what is right and wrong. This is intrinsic to who you are, your organic integrity - you cannot separate yourself from it, Utilitarianism is asking you to disregard part of yourself

  
  

  E.g: issue with 5 people dying, need organ transplants, doctor's neighbor is a match for all 5 people. A utilitarian would ask the doctor to kill the neighbor to take his organs and give to the patients, this is seen as the most moral act

  It is likely to go against the doctor's own moral integrity.
• Partiality (issue with utilitarianism)


  Utilitarianism demands individuals to be impartial and ignore the significant relationships we have (e.g: with our family). Utilitarianism asks us to act for the greatest good of individuals, with no exceptions based on personal relations. However, it is common sense and natural that people are more concerned about people we have close relationships with, rather than strangers. Utilitarianism asks us to disregard this. Arguably, this diminishes acts of kindness and loyalty, appearing cold
• Tyranny of the majority

  Just because and act maximises pleasure to the majority, this does not mean it is moral - individuals may be treated unfairly.

  
  

  e.g: Gladiator fighting in the roman times

  This brings pleasure to the majority, but, it brings extreme amount of pain to individuals, is this moral?

  
  

  Individual fairness and liberty are very important and shouldn't be ignored
• Utilitarianism defense of partiality


  Utilitarianism leads to the overall greatest good, which leads to the happiness of the majority individuals, likely to include those close to us. Therefore, we should always act in utilitarian way.
• Utilitarianism response to tyranny of the majority 


  Rule Utilitarianism, creates rules from the Utility principle to follow in all circumstances which maximise pleasure for the majority. Issues such as gladiator fighting would not be permitted with rule utilitarianism due to the rule 'do not kill'
• Issues with calculation

  Future consequences are incalculable in such a complex world. Most situations have unique outcomes, how can we predict the consequences?

  Furthermore, the hedonic calculus asks us to quantify the amount of pleasure an action gives, however, this is subjective for individuals and an action may be more moral for one person and less for another due to individual preferences.
• Utilitarianism response to issues with calculation

  We only need to have reasonable expectations of what the consequences will be like, we can make rational predictions based on how similar actions have occurred in the past
• Preference utilitarianism

  Instead of maximising pleasure we should maximise people's preferences
• An example of preference utilitarianism being used is that preference utilitarians would oblige to the dead's wishes whereas act utilitarians would choose the action for the dead person that brings the most pleasure even if it wasn't what they wanted
• Stage one of Mill's proof - happiness is good

  There are 3 parts to why happiness is good.

  1. People desire desirable (good) things
  2. Everyone wants happiness
  3. Happiness for each person gives everyone happiness
• Moores objection for Stage 1 of Mill's proof

  People may desire, wrong , immoral things

  "People desire all sorts of rubbish"

  Mill responded by saying that that some people want bad things, but most don't
• Stage 2 of Mill's proof - Only happiness is good

  Everything valuable leads to happiness (beauty, truth ect). People desire many different things and all of these lead to happiness.