330 likes | 702 Views
Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism. Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832). John Stuart Mill (1806-1873). Utilitarianism. The ultimate moral principle is the Principle of Utility :
E N D
Utilitarianism Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) John Stuart Mill (1806-1873)
Utilitarianism The ultimate moral principle is the Principle of Utility: The right thing to do, in any situation, is whatever would produce the best overall outcome for all those who will be affected by your action.
Utilitarianism “The greatest happiness for the greatest number” The right thing to do is whatever would have the best overall consequences. Which consequences matter? What’s important is human welfare—we want people to be as well-off as possible. Each person’s welfare is equally important.
Utilitarianism Some practical implications: Abolition of slavery; equal rights for women; abolition of child labor
Utilitarianism Some practical implications: Abolition of slavery; equal rights for women and minorities; abolition of child labor Prison reform: deterrence and rehabilitation, not vengeance
Three ways of responding to crime: • Retribution • Deterrence • Rehabilitation
Pay the S.O.B. back for his wicked deeds. Why? Because he deserves it. Retribution
Deterrence Attach penalties to certain sorts of actions.
Deterrence Why?
Deterrence So that people won’t do them.
Provide education and other kinds of help Why? So that criminals will be changed into good citizens. Rehabilitation
Consequences of Rehabilitationism • Changes in nomenclature • Indeterminate sentences • Parole system • Different punishments for different offenders
Utilitarianism Some practical implications: Abolition of slavery; equal rights for women and minorities; abolition of child labor Prison reform: deterrence and rehabilitation, not vengeance We have extensive charitable duties.
Utilitarianism Some practical implications: Abolition of slavery; equal rights for women and minorities; abolition of child labor Prison reform: deterrence and rehabilitation, not vengeance We have extensive charitable duties. Mercy-killing can sometimes be permissible.
The Utilitarian argument for mercy-killing: Any action that prevents suffering is morally acceptable, provided that it does not cause greater suffering somewhere else. In some instances, providing a dying person with a quicker death, at his or her own request, will prevent considerable suffering, without causing anyone else to suffer. Therefore, in at least some instances, mercy-killing is morally acceptable.
Utilitarianism Some practical implications: Abolition of slavery; equal rights for women and minorities; abolition of child labor Prison reform: deterrence and rehabilitation, not vengeance We have extensive charitable duties. Mercy-killing can sometimes be permissible. Animals count, too.
Same amount of pain Same amount of moral concern = Human Pain Animal Pain
The Utilitarian argument that we shouldn’t eat meat: 1. We should not cause unnecessary pain and suffering. 2. In the modern meat-production business, animals are caused great suffering. 3. This isn’t necessary, because we could nourish ourselves without doing it. 4. Therefore, we should stop doing it. We should be vegetarians instead.