Session 3: Utilitarianism

1. Session 3: Utilitarianism Dr. Chan Ho Mun Dept of Public & Social Administration City University of Hong Kong June 7, 2007

2. Categories of Deontic Evaluation • The Greek original of “Deontic” is “deon”, which means “duty”. • Three categories (Timmons 2002): • Obligatoryactions are actions that one ought to do. • Wrong actions are those that ought not to be done. • Optionalactions are neither obligatory nor wrong. • Right actions in the narrow sense are obligatory. • Rights actions in the broad sense are either obligatory or optional.

3. A finer categorization (Driver 2007): • (1) Obligatory actions • (2) Supererogatory actions • (3) Permissible actions • (4) Suberogatory actions • (5) Forbidden actions • Rights actions could mean (1), (1)+(2), or (1)+(2)+(3).

4. Categories of Values • Intrinsic value: Something is intrinsically good (or valuable) if it is good (or has value) in and of itself. • Extrinsic value: Something is extrinsically good if it related to something else that is good, so its goodness is borrowed.

5. Three categories of values: • Intrinsically good • Intrinsically value-neutral • Intrinsically bad • Moral Value and Nonmoral value • Moral value is ascribable only to responsible agents (persons). • Other things, including experiences and states of affairs, have nonmoral value.

6. Hedonism vs Pluralism • Hedonism: Happiness is the only intrinsic good. • Pluralism: There is more than one intrinsic good.

7. Utilitarianism • It is a consequence-based theory (consequentialist theory). • The deontic status of an action is defined solely in terms of the utility of the consequence produced by the action. • Utility is a nonmoral value and the ultimate goal of morality is to maximize the aggregate utility. • Virtue-based consideration is out of the picture.

8. An action is obligatory if it has a utility higher than any alternative actions. • An action is wrong if it has a utility less than some other alternatives. • An action is optional if it is tied with some other alternative for first place. • An action is right (in the broad sense) if it has a utility no less than any other alternative action.

9. Classical Utilitarianism • Classical utilitarianism is hedonistic. • The utility of an action is defined as the overall balance between happiness and unhappiness produced by the action. • Bentham’s version • Happiness is identified with the pleasure (and the absence of pain). • Unhappiness is identified with pain (and the deprivation of pleasure).

10. Greatest happiness principle: In our actions, we should aim at producing the greatest happiness of the greatest number, or if impossible, then reducing the unhappiness of the greatest number. • Mill’s version • Quality matters. • The life of dissatisfied Socrates is morally better than that of a happy fool.

11. Mill’s Proof • Part I: • Everyone desires his/her happiness for its own sake. • Everything that is desired for its own sake is desirable. (Every object that is seen is visible). • If something is desirable, it is intrinsically valuable. • One’s own happiness is therefore an intrinsic good for oneself, which implies that general happiness is intrinsically good for the aggregate of persons.

12. Part II: • If some other things besides happiness that are desired for themselves, they are desired as part of the end of happiness. • Thus, happiness is the only intrinsic good. • Criticism: “Desirable” is ambiguous. It can mean “able to be desired” or “worthy of being desired”.

13. Strength of Utilitarianism • A secular morality • Based on human nature • A common sense approach • Egalitarianism • Focus on human wellbeing • Simple: only outcome counts • A decision procedure • Cost-benefit analysis is a utilitarian approach that is widely used in public policy analysis and decision making.

14. Objections to Utilitarianism • The problem of comparability. • Too demanding: The money for an ice cream could be used to bring about much greater happiness in a very poor country. Supererogatory actions become obligatory. • Too impartial: Whom should you save when both are drowning? Your mother who is very old or a young and famous professional?

15. William’s story of Jim and the Indians • Utilitarianism makes no distinction between doing and allowing something to happen. For utilitarians, one is equally just as responsible in one case as much as in another (the doctrine of negative responsibility). • Utilitarianism could undermine ones moral integrity.

16. Human Rights and Criminal Justice • The values of freedom of speech and so on are intrinsic. They are respected even they cannot bring out the best outcome. • Suppose a police officer has found some convincing evidence to press charge against the top leader of a triad society, but he actually has not committed the crime in question. It seems that he should be prosecuted if the utilitarian approach is followed.

17. Political Equality • Suppose having a landfill nearby will diminish property value by 20% within a one-mile radius. • According to CBA, people in the poor side of the town will have to suffer in order to avoid a greater monetary losses by rich people. • Equal worth to each dollar vs. equal worth to each human being.

18. Our obligations to others: A promise still has its moral force although breaking it can so happen to produce a better outcome. • Using individuals as means. • Claims of needs vs claims of utility • Rationing in an Accident and Emergency Ward. • Organ transplant. • Welfare

19. Act-utilitarianism vs Rule-utilitarianism • Following a moral rule can bring about desirable effect in the long run. • Complexity: The cost of figuring out whether we should break a rule can be higher than the benefit gained. • Rule-utilitarianism: • An action is right if one act in accordance with a moral rule whose associated utility in the long run is no less than the utility associated with any alternative moral rule.

20. Criticism: • Suppose it is clear and obvious that breaking a rule in a certain situation would not have long term negative effect. Should you break it? • If you say “no”, it means that you are not a true utilitarian. • If you say “yes”, the distinction between act-utilitarianism and rule-utilitarianism becomes blurred.

21. Pluralistic (Restricted) Utilitarianism • Outcome matters, though not exclusively. It is not everything, but it is not nothing either. • Utilitarianism is acceptable if other moral constraints are taken into considerations. • The application of utilitarianism sometimes can promote other values. Efficiency and justice are not always incompatible.

22. Some public agencies are created to achieve certain results. They are not supposed to produce results better than any others, all things considered. • The consequentialist consideration should be constrained by the functional specialization of the public agency in question.

23. Very often moral agents are expected to maximize only a specific kind of results in a certain context. • Example 1: The triage in ICU aims to maximize medical utility, not social utility. Otherwise, the education background and other factors of the patient have to be taken into consideration, and the result can be ruthless.

24. Example 2: Drugs outside the Standard Drug Formulary • (1) Drugs proven to be of significant benefits but expensive for the public health care system to provide as part of its subsidized service • (2) Drugs which have preliminary medical evidence only • (3) Drugs with marginal benefits over available alternatives but at significantly higher costs • (4) Life style drugs e.g. anti-obesity drugs