Utilitarianism

1. Utilitarianism

2. On the Need for a First Principle Ethical rules are rules of action. • They tell us what actions we ought to do and which we should refrain from doing All rules of action recommend an action for a certain end.

3. On the Need for a First Principle Is the following a good rule of action? Eat salads instead of cheeseburgers. • If your end is to be healthier it seems good. • If your end is to eat something delicious, it isn’t as good.

4. On the Need for a First Principle To have any hope of understanding the rules for moral action, we need to know the end towards which morality aims.

5. “Pleasure, and freedom from pain, are the only things desirable as ends; and that all desirable things (which are as numerous in the utilitarian as in any other scheme) are desirable either for the pleasure inherent in themselves, or as means to the promotion of pleasure and the prevention of pain.” (2.2)

6. Instrumental vs. Intrinsic Goods An instrumental good is something that is good because it allows you to acquire something else that is good (e.g. money) An intrinsic good is something that is good in itself, or for its own sake.

7. The Greatest Happiness Principle Hedonism: Pleasure and the avoidance of suffering are the only intrinsic goods. (Utility=pleasure)

8. The Greatest Happiness Principle The Greatest Happiness Principle: Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. (2.2)

9. The Greatest Happiness Principle Three questions about GHP: • What is happiness? • Whose happiness matters? • How should we act in order to follow GHP?

10. The Greatest Happiness Principle What is happiness? Happiness= pleasure and the absence of pain Unhappiness(i.e. the opposite of happiness)= pain or the absence of pleasure.

11. The Greatest Happiness Principle Whose happiness matters? • Any sentient being capable of feeling pain/pleasure. • No one’s pleasure is intrinsically more important than anyone else’s.

12. The Greatest Happiness Principle “As between his own happiness and that of others, utilitarianism requires him to be as strictly impartial as a disinterested and benevolent spectator.” (2.18)

13. The Greatest Happiness Principle What is important is aggregate happiness, which is the collective amount of pleasure and suffering of all who can feel these things.

14. The Greatest Happiness Principle How should we act? The right action is that action which produces the greatest amount of total aggregate happiness.

15. The Greatest Happiness Principle Three questions about GHP: • What is happiness? • Pleasure and the absence of pain • Whose happiness matters? • Any creature who can feel pleasure and pain. • How should we act in order to follow GHP? • Always act to maximize aggregate happiness

16. Intuitive Appeal of GHP Things that cause suffering: • Murder • Rape • Theft • Physical or emotional assault Things that cause pleasure: • Kindness • Charity • Friendship • Love

17. Intuitive Appeal of GHP Gives a nice account of comparative moral judgments: • Murder is worse than stealing your roommate’s sandwich. • Saving someone’s life is better than keeping a lunch appointment.

18. Intuitive Appeal of GHP It allows for plausible exceptions to moral rules: • Torture is wrong. • What if by torturing someone you could get information that prevented a bomb from blowing up Manhattan? • Theft is wrong. • What if you and your family are starving and you steal food? • Lying is wrong. • White lies • Santa Claus

19. The Swine Objection The Swine Objection • To claim that the only desirable thing is pleasure is “base” or “mean and groveling.” • Only dumb animals such as swine have no greater desires beyond pleasure and the avoidance of suffering. • Therefore, Mill’s hedonism is false.

20. The Swine Objection Mill’s Response: “When thus attacked, the Epicureans have always answered, that it is not they, but their accusers, who represent human nature in a degrading light; since the accusation supposes human beings to be capable of no pleasures except those of which swine are capable…The comparison of the Epicurean life to that of beasts is felt as degrading, precisely because a beast’s pleasures do not satisfy a human’s conception of happiness. Human beings have faculties more elevated than animal appetites, and when once made conscious of them, do not regard anything a happiness which does not include their gratification.” (2.4)

21. The Hierarchy of Pleasures Some pleasures are more valuable than others and thus count more, morally speaking, than others. But how do we determine which pleasures are more valuable?

22. The Hierarchy of Pleasures Mill’s Test “Of two pleasures, if there be one to which all or almost all who have experience of both give a decided preference, irrespective of any feeling of moral obligation to prefer it, that is the more desirable pleasure.” (2.5)

23. The Hierarchy of Pleasures Mill thinks that the results of this test are: • Pleasures of the intellect are higher pleasures than “base” pleasures. • E.g. appreciation of beauty and the desire for intellectual gratification are preferable to sex, drugs, etc.

24. The Hierarchy of Pleasures Is Hume right about this? Suppose I made you the following offer: • Tomorrow you will wake up and be a pig. • You will be as stupid as a pig, won’t remember being a human, and you will get all the pig sex, food, and comfort that a pig could hope for. • How many people would take the offer?

25. Is Happiness Possible? Mill has a lengthy discussion about whether or not happiness is possible, and whether or not we can do without it.

26. Is Happiness Possible? Highlights • Even if happiness is impossible utilitarianism could still be true (avoidance of suffering) • A “continuity of pleasurable excitement” may be unobtainable, but more limited pleasures are in abundance. • A satisfied life consists of both pleasure and tranquility

27. Is Happiness Possible? Highlights • We can learn to do without happiness. • We can sacrifice ourselves for the happiness of others or for no good reason. • But simply because we can live without happiness, doesn’t mean we should. • Any sacrifice or suffering that does not increase total happiness is “wasted.” (2.17)

28. Calculation of Utility If we must always act to maximize happiness we need to know (or at least have a good idea) about which of our actions will do so.

29. Calculation of Utility Sometimes we don’t (or can’t) know all the consequences of our actions. • Light switch case • Distant causal consequences

30. Expected Utility Expected Utility: The amount of happiness that, given all that you can reasonably be expected to know, your actions will bring about.

31. Expected Utility The Greatest Happiness Principle (Expected Utility Formulation):Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote expected utility, wrong as they tend to promote expected disutility.

32. Calculation of Utility Even taking into account this revision, there is still a problem: We simply don’t have time in many cases to calculate even the expected utility accurately. • Beggar Case First response: could be a problem for every moral theory.

33. Calculation of Utility “People talk as if the commencement of this course of experience had hitherto been put off, and as if, at the moment when some man feels tempted to meddle with the property or life of another, he had to begin considering for the first time whether murder or theft are injurious to human happiness…Mankind must by this time have acquired positive beliefs as to the effects of some actions on their happiness; and the beliefs which have thus come down are the rules of morality for the multitude, and for the philosopher until he has succeeded in finding better…It is a strange notion that acknowledgment of a first principle is inconsistent with the admission of secondary ones.” (2.24)

34. Act vs. Rule Utilitarianism Act Utilitarianism (AU): At a given time, you should perform one of the actions available to you that will lead to the maximum aggregate happiness.

35. Act vs. Rule Utilitarianism Rule Utilitarianism (RU):Your actions should conform to a set of moral rules. You should act only in accordance with those rules, the adoption of which would lead to the greatest aggregate happiness.

36. Act vs. Rule Utilitarianism The Difference • AU applies GHP directly to actions. • You should always choose the action that maximizes happiness. • RU applies GHP to sets of rules. • You should follow rules that maximize happiness.

37. Rule Utilitarianism RU has some advantages over AU: • Gladiator case The suffering of the gladiators seems outweighed by the pleasure of the crowd. • AU seems committed to saying that bloodsports of this kind are perfectly fine, perhaps even to be encouraged.

38. Rule Utilitarianism RU has some advantages over AU: • Gladiator case RU does not. • The rule: “cause suffering for entertainment purposes.” • If everyone followed this rule, it would not maximize happiness.

39. Problems for Rule Utilitarianism Problem #2: Collapse to AU “Don’t lie” seems plausible as a rule that maximizes happiness. But there seem to be exceptions: • Ax murderer case

40. Problems for Rule Utilitarianism Problem #2: Collapse to AU Maybe “Don’t lie” doesn’t maximize happiness. How about: “Don’t lie, unless someone’s life is at stake”? • Jack Bauer and the terrorist

41. Problems for Rule Utilitarianism Problem #2: Collapse to AU The proper rule looks like it will be something like: “Don’t lie, unless doing so maximizes happiness.” But this is act utilitarianism!

42. For Next Time Catch up reading (through CH. 4 of Utilitarianism) Reminder: Paper due Friday!

43. RU Collapses to AU Take the rule: “don’t steal.” There are clearly going to be exceptions to this general rule. Suppose you need to steal food to feed your starving child. • Unless you are stealing from someone else who is starving this generates more happiness.

44. RU Collapses to AU Don’t steal unless: • You need to do so in order to feed a starving child. But what if you are Robin Hood stealing from the rich and giving to the poor? • Generates more happiness

45. RU Collapses to AU Don’t steal unless: • You need to do so in order to feed a starving child, OR • You are stealing from the very wealthy to help the poor. But what if you are stealing medicine to save someone’s life? • So long as you are not putting someone else’s life at immediate risk, this generates more happiness.

46. RU Collapses to AU Don’t steal unless: • You need to do so in order to feed a starving child OR • You are stealing from the very wealthy to help the poor OR • You are stealing something that saves someone’s life…OR

47. RU Collapses to AU RU determines which rules are better solely by the happiness that they generate if followed: Suppose that I can steal from my friend: • She won’t notice what is missing (ever) • She won’t ever blame me or find out about it. • No one else will ever find out about it. • It makes me marginally happier (and doesn’t change her happiness at all) Call this exact case CASE 1.

48. RU Collapses to AU Don’t steal unless: • You need to do so in order to feed a starving child OR • You are stealing from the very wealthy to help the poor OR • You are stealing something that saves someone’s life…OR • CASE 1 obtains…OR

49. RU Collapses to AU If we keep adding happiness generating exceptions the rule becomes: Don’t steal unless: • Doing so generates more aggregate happiness than refraining from stealing. But this is equivalent to act utilitarianism.

50. Act Utilitarianism and Moral Rules AU regards moral rules like “don’t kill” and “don’t lie” as good rules of thumb. • You can take these for granted in many cases and use them to guide your actions. • There will be some cases in which exceptions are called for. • These will be cases in which the rules conflict with GHP.