Utilitarianism In this lecture Evaluating actions The principle

Utilitarianism

In this lecture… § Evaluating actions § The principle of utility § Strengths § Criticisms § Rule utilitarianism 2

Evaluating actions § A theory can be defined as a framework of principles and related concepts that can be applied to analyze situations, explain phenomena or deal with problems. 3

Evaluating actions § In the study of ethics, we often make use of moral theories to evaluate actions, decisions and practices. § Moral theories also provide justifications for moral beliefs and judgments by giving explanations as to why certain actions are right or wrong. 4

Evaluating actions § Broadly speaking, there are 2 main theoretical approaches to ethics: § Deontological theories evaluate actions in terms of duty or moral rules. § Consequentialist theories evaluate actions in terms of consequences. 5

Evaluating actions § Deontology, or ‘duty-based ethics’, is the view that we have a duty to do what is right (and avoid doing what is wrong) by following some moral rules or principles. 6

Evaluating actions § Suppose the principle ‘You should be nice to those people who are nice to you’ is generally accepted by everyone. § From a deontological point of view, an action that accords with the principle is intrinsically right (right in itself). 7

Evaluating actions § Deontology demands that we do what is intrinsically right and refrain from doing what is intrinsically wrong. It is our duty to conform to generally accepted moral principles. § The best known deontological ethical theory is the one put forward by German philosopher Immanuel Kant. 8

Evaluating actions § Consequentialism, on the other hand, asserts that actions should be evaluated in terms of their consequences. § From a c 0 nsequentialist point of view, actions are not right or wrong in themselves. An action is right if it brings good consequences, and wrong if it brings bad consequences. 9

Evaluating actions § For example, an act of lying is not intrinsically wrong; it is wrong only if it leads to bad consequences. § The best known consequentialist ethical theory is utilitarianism, the moral philosophy propounded by English philosophers Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. 10

The principle of utility § Suppose you are a lawyer. You have a client who is an old lady who owns a big house. She tells you that she wants her dog to inherit the house after she dies. You promise her you will see to it that her dog will be the only future owner of the house. However, you also notice that there are not enough schools for children in the district. 11

The principle of utility § What would you do when the old lady dies – keep your promise and honor her wish, or break the promise and convert the house into a school for poor children? 12

The principle of utility § Some may argue that lawyers, as professionals, must always keep their promises and honor the wishes of their clients. § Others, however, may think that converting the house into a school is the right thing to do because it can help a lot of poor children. 13

The principle of utility § If you believe that the right action is always the one that brings about the best consequences, you are thinking in utilitarian terms. § Utilitarianism, as a form of consequentialism, evaluates actions in terms of their consequences. 14

The principle of utility The classical formulation of utilitarianism can be found in the writings of Jeremy Bentham, who equated morality with the maximization of happiness or utility. 15

The principle of utility § As a social reformer, Bentham believed that morality, as well as law and social policy, should all have the same goal; namely, to promote general happiness and well-being. § The purpose of morality, as he saw it, was to make the world a better place for everyone. 16

The principle of utility § Bentham and his followers saw their ethical theory as providing the basis for legal and social reforms. § They wanted to reduce suffering and promote happiness. They wanted to make law serve human needs and interests. They wanted social policy to work for the good of all citizens. 17

The principle of utility § For Bentham, happiness is the only thing that has intrinsic value, i. e. the only thing that is good in itself. § Other things such as money or freedom may be good too, but only to the extent that they produce happiness; what these things have is instrumental value, not intrinsic value. 18

The principle of utility § Money has no intrinsic value. It is not good or valuable in itself. It is just a means to an end. The end is happiness. § Sometimes you can use money to buy happiness. Sometimes you cannot. Money has (instrumental) value only when it buys you happiness. 19

The principle of utility § From a utilitarian point of view, actions are not right or wrong in themselves. § An action is right if it brings more happiness (pleasure) than unhappiness (pain or suffering), and wrong if it causes more unhappiness than happiness. 20

The principle of utility § In other words, whether an action is right or wrong depends entirely on its consequences. An action is right if the good consequences follow from it outweigh the bad consequences. § The best action is the one that is likely to result in the greatest amount of overall happiness. 21

The principle of utility § Bentham’s ‘classical utilitarianism’ can be summarized in 3 propositions: § First, actions are to be judged right or wrong solely in virtue of their consequences. Nothing else matters. Right actions are, simply, those that have the best consequences. 22

The principle of utility § Second, in assessing consequences, the only thing that matters is the amount of happiness or unhappiness that is caused. Everything else is irrelevant. Thus, right actions are those that produce the greatest balance of happiness over unhappiness. 23

The principle of utility § Third, in calculating the happiness or unhappiness caused by an action, no one’s happiness is to be counted as more important than anyone else’s. Each person’s welfare or well-being is equally important. In short, everyone counts, and everyone counts equally. 24

The principle of utility § Putting it all together, the most fundamental principle of utilitarianism is ‘the Principle of Utility’ (also known as ‘the Greatest Happiness Principle’): We ought to perform the action that produces the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. 25

The principle of utility § The ‘utility’ of an action is the net amount of pleasure (over pain) that it causes when everyone affected by it is taken into consideration. § Utility, in other words, is the total amount of happiness (pleasure) minus the total amount of unhappiness (pain or suffering). 26

The principle of utility § When calculating the utility of actions, we have to make sure that the pleasure and pain of everyone affected must be factored into the equation. § The best action is the one that maximizes utility. 27

The principle of utility § There are two major assumptions here: § Utility (the net amount of pleasure resulting from an action) can be measured and calculated objectively. § The consequences of actions are more or less predictable. 28

The principle of utility § From a utilitarian perspective, there is no need to consider the motives or intentions for which people do what they do. § When we evaluate actions, the only thing that matters is the (actual or expected) consequences of those actions. 29

The principle of utility § To sum up, according to the Principle of Utility, we should calculate and compare the expected consequences of various alternative actions and then choose the one that maximizes happiness or utility for everyone concerned. 30

Strengths § An attractive feature of utilitarianism is that it has given morality a clear purpose: to promote general well-being or maximize overall happiness. § The right action is the one that brings the greatest amount of happiness to the greatest number of people. 31

Strengths § In addition, utilitarianism offers a logical and reasonable solution to moral decision making. § In our daily lives we use utilitarian reasoning all the time: We give money to charity when seeing that it would do more good for needy people than it would for ourselves. 32

Strengths § Utilitarianism provides a universal standard of morality according to which everyone’s interests and well-being must be taken into consideration and given equal weight. § As such, utilitarianism embodies the ideal of equal concern for all. 33

Strengths § For example, from a utilitarian point of view, policymakers are expected to make decisions based on calculation of the effects of policies on society as a whole. They should not choose policies that favor themselves or their families and friends. 34

Strengths § Utilitarianism also encourages us to extend our ethical concern to animals. § Because animals, like humans, can experience pleasure and pain, utilitarian reasoning requires that we take animal welfare into consideration when making moral decisions. 35

Criticisms § One criticism of utilitarianism is that measuring and calculating utility is by no means an easy task. § Is it possible or meaningful to compare, in quantitative terms, the pleasure we get from eating an ice-cream and the pleasure we get from helping a friend? 36

Criticisms § Different people may have different ideas of ‘happiness’ or ‘pleasure. ’ § John Stuart Mill, for example, suggested that we have to distinguish between lower, bodily pleasures (e. g. eating, drinking, and sexual activity) and higher pleasures (i. e. intellectual, creative and spiritual pursuits). 37

Criticisms § Mill thought that the higher pleasures are superior to, and thus more valuable than, the lower ones. § In his view, it is not the quantity (amount) but the quality (type) of pleasure that matters. 38

Criticisms § Another objection to utilitarian reasoning is that it is usually extremely difficult, if not impossible, to predict the precise consequences of actions. 39

Criticisms § Consider the following example: § A child asked Alice for money to get home. Alice bought a train ticket for the child. Unfortunately, the train was involved in an accident and the child was injured. Was it morally wrong for Alice to buy the ticket for the child? 40

Criticisms § It is usually very difficult to predict the long-term consequences of actions. § Even if we agree with utilitarianism on principle, the best we can do is to perform the action that is most likely to have the best overall consequences. 41

Criticisms § Utilitarianism has also been criticized for only considering the results of actions, without taking into account the motives of people’s actions. § In the previous example, Alice’s action is not wrong if intention, rather than consequence, is seen as the most relevant factor in evaluating her action. 42

Criticisms § Some people argue that utilitarianism is too demanding because we are often required to promote the interests and well-being of others at the expense of our own. 43

Criticisms § The implication of the Principle of Utility is that in order to maximize overall utility and promote general welfare, continual selfsacrifice is often necessary, for example, by giving up one’s time and money to help the needy. 44

Criticisms § According to utilitarian reasoning, you should sell your i. Phone (or you should not have bought it in the first place) and donate the money to the Save the Children Fund. Why? Because the starving children in Africa need the money to buy food more than you need your i. Phone. 45

Criticisms § Most of us are aware that spending $1, 000 on food for some unknown person in Africa would create more happiness than spending it on entertainment for ourselves. But most of us would not make the utilitarian choice because we think that our own happiness is more important. 46

Criticisms § Another problem with utilitarianism is the implication that a person’s rights could be sacrificed if it would maximize happiness for others. § A good example is the invasion of the privacy of a celebrity (e. g. by placing a hidden camera in her bathroom) for the entertainment of the public. 47

Criticisms § Suppose a friend of yours installed a hidden video camera in your bathroom without you noticing it. He enjoys watching you take showers but you are not aware of it. From the utilitarian point of view, it seems there is nothing wrong with your friend’s actions. 48

Criticisms § Now, if your friend goes further by sharing the nude videos taken of you over the internet. Do you think his actions can be morally justified in terms of the Principle of Utility? 49

Criticisms § A common objection to utilitarian reasoning is that it can be used to justify any action that is likely to bring happiness to many people. § Cheating, stealing, lying, and even killing may all seem to be justified, depending on whether they maximize utility in some particular situation. 50

Criticisms § If it could be shown, for example, that publicly hanging someone who is innocent would have the direct beneficial effect of reducing violent crime by serving as a deterrent, then a utilitarian would say that hanging the innocent person is the morally right thing to do. 51

Criticisms § As shown in the above examples, the utilitarian justification for immoral actions is misguided and unacceptable. § Most of us would agree that an individual’s rights should never be violated or sacrificed no matter how much happiness it might bring to others. 52

Rule utilitarianism § In view of the weaknesses of utilitarianism, some philosophers propose that the classical formulation of utilitarianism has to be modified. § They suggest that we should apply the Principle of Utility to ‘rules’ rather than ‘acts’. 53

Rule utilitarianism § It was John Stuart Mill who first proposed that happiness is generally ‘more successfully pursued by acting on general rules than by measuring the consequences of each act. ’ 54

Rule utilitarianism § The new theory known as ‘rule utilitarianism’ applies the Principle of Utility to moral rules. § The best way to promote general welfare, according to rule utilitarianism, is to adhere to those rules that are likely to produce the greatest good for all. 55

Rule utilitarianism § Act utilitarianism: We consider the expected consequences of various acts and choose the one that maximizes happiness. § Rule utilitarianism: After comparing the expected outcomes of following various rules, we choose to follow the one that is likely to have the best outcome. 56

Rule utilitarianism § As a general rule, punishing innocent people produces more unhappiness than happiness. § Thus, in the previous example, we should adopt the rule ‘Never punish the innocent’ because the adoption of this rule is likely to produce the best consequence for society as a whole. 57

Rule utilitarianism § Actions that violate the rule can never be morally justified, although there might be particular instances in which punishing an innocent person would produce more happiness than unhappiness. 58

Rule utilitarianism § A doctor has five patients under his care. One of the patients needs to have a heart transplant, one needs two lungs, one needs a liver, and the last two need kidneys. Now into his office comes a young healthy man who just wants to have a flu shot. 59

Rule utilitarianism § Doing a utility calculus, there is no doubt in the doctor’s mind that he could do more good by injecting the healthy man with a sleep-inducing drug and using his organs to save the patients. Is there anything wrong with this line of thinking? 60

Rule utilitarianism § In the above example, there at least three reasons to oppose classical (act) utilitarian reasoning: § First, it is unjust to sacrifice the life of an innocent person who does not deserve to die. 61

Rule utilitarianism § Second, killing the healthy young man clearly violates his right to life, a universal human right. § Finally, the general public will lose trust in the medical profession if they are aware that unsuspecting patients have been murdered in hospitals and their organs harvested for transplant. 62

Rule utilitarianism § Given these objections, a rule utilitarian would argue that the act of ‘killing one to save five’ can never be morally justified. § Certain actions must be forbidden, even if they might sometimes achieve good results. 63

Rule utilitarianism § All doctors, as the argument goes, must abide by the rules laid down in the medical code of ethics which strictly prohibit the removal or transplant of organs without patients’ consent. 64

Rule utilitarianism § Broadly speaking, a ‘rule’ can be a law, a social norm, a custom or convention, a regulation, or a professional code of practice. § The medical code of ethics is a good example of applying rule utilitarian reasoning to practical moral issues. 65

Rule utilitarianism § For rule utilitarianism to work, the rule that has been chosen must be a clearly defined rule of conduct that can be followed consistently by all members of a society, group or profession. § If following the rule has the best overall consequence for everyone, it is a rule that must be followed at all times. 66

Rule utilitarianism § In August 1945, the US Air Force made history by dropping atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These two bombs killed nearly 200, 000 civilians and reduced both cities to rubble. Japan surrendered immediately on seeing the incredible devastation caused by those bombs. 67

Rule utilitarianism § Can we say, in hindsight, that sacrificing civilian lives can be justified on utilitarian grounds? Does the end (stopping the war) justify the means (murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians)? 68

Rule utilitarianism § Do you think the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki can be justified from the standpoint of rule utilitarianism? Why or why not? 69

Rule utilitarianism § What is the most heavily bombed country in human history? 70

Rule utilitarianism § What would a utilitarian say about the bombing of Laos? Cluster munitions, a kind of weapon designed to kill and maim indiscriminately, were used in massive quantities during the bombing missions. Do you think that there is something intrinsically wrong about the use of cluster bombs? 71