Download - Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
1/34
Lawrence M. Hinman, Ph.D.Director, The Values Institute
University of San iego
12/7/2015 Lawrence M. Hinman 1
Utilitarianism
mailto:[email protected]?subject=PowerPoint%20Presentationmailto:[email protected]?subject=PowerPoint%20Presentation -
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
2/34
12/7/2015 Lawrence M. Hinman 2
Overview
1. Fundamental Tenets ofUtilitarianism
2. Standards of Utility/History ofUtilitarianism
3. The Utilitarian Calculus
4. Act and Rule Utilitarianism
5. Criticisms of Utilitarianism
6. Concluding Assessment
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
3/34
12/7/2015 Lawrence M. Hinman 3
Part One.
Fundamental Tenets
ofUtilitarianism
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
4/34
12/7/2015 Lawrence M. Hinman 4
Basic Insights of Util itarianism
The purpose of morality is to makethe world a better place.
Morality is about producing goodconsequences, not having goodintentions
We should do whatever will bring the
most benefit (i.e., intrinsic value) toall of humanity.
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
5/34
12/7/2015 Lawrence M. Hinman
5
The Purpose of Morality
The utilitarian has a very simpleanswer to the question of whymorality exists at all:
The purpose of morality is to guidepeoples actions in such a way as toproduce a better world.
Consequently, the emphasis inutilitarianism is on consequences,not intentions.
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
6/34
12/7/2015 Lawrence M. Hinman
6
Fundamental Imperative
The fundamental imperative of
util itarianism is:
Always act in the way that will producethe greatest overall amount of good in
the world.
The emphasis is clearly onconsequences, not intentions.
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
7/34
12/7/2015 Lawrence M. Hinman
7
The Emphasis on the Overall Good
We often speak of utilitarian solutions ina disparaging tone, but in factutil itarianism is a demanding moral
posit ion that often asks us to put asideself-interest for the sake of the whole.
Util itarianism is a morally demandingposition for two reasons:
It always asks us to do the most, to maximizeutility, not to do the minimum.
It asks us to set aside personal interest.
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
8/34
12/7/2015 Lawrence M. Hinman
8
The Dream of Utilitarianism:
Bringing Scientif ic Certainty to Ethics
Utili tarianism offers us a powerful visionof the moral li fe, one that promises toreduce or eliminate moral disagreement. If we can agree that the purpose of morality is
to make the world a better place; and
If we can scientifically assess various possiblecourses of action to determine which will have
the greatest positive effect on the world; thenWe can provide a scientific answer to the
question of what we ought to do.
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
9/34
12/7/2015 Lawrence M. Hinman
9
Part Two.
Standards of Utility:
A History ofUtilitarianism
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
10/34
12/7/2015 Lawrence M. Hinman
10
Intrinsic Value
Many things have instrumental value, that is, theyhave value as means to an end.
However, there must be some things which arenot merely instrumental, but have value inthemselves. This is what we call intrinsic value.
What has intrinsic value? Four principalcandidates: Pleasure
Jeremy Bentham
Happiness John Stuart Mill
Ideals G. E. Moore
Preferences Kenneth Arrow
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
11/34
12/7/2015 Lawrence M. Hinman
11
Jeremy Bentham
1748-1832
Bentham believed
that we should try
to increase theoverall amount of
pleasure in the
world.
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
12/34
12/7/2015 Lawrence M. Hinman
12
Pleasure
Definit ion: Theenjoyable feeling weexperience when astate of deprivationis replaced byfulfillment.
AdvantagesEasy to quantify
Short duration
Bodily
Criticisms
Came to be known
as the pigsphilosophy
Ignores higher
values
Could justify livingon a pleasure
machine
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
13/34
12/7/2015 Lawrence M. Hinman
13
John Stuart Mill
1806-1873
Benthams godson
Believed that
happiness, notpleasure, should
be the standard of
utility.
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
14/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
14
Happiness
Advantages
A higher standard,
more specific tohumans
About realization of
goals
Disadvantages
More difficult to
measureCompeting
conceptions of
happiness
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
15/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
15
Ideal Values
G. E. Mooresuggested that weshould strive to maximize idealvalues such as freedom,knowledge, justice, and beauty.
The world may not be a betterplace with more pleasure in it ,but it certainly will be a betterplace with more freedom, moreknowledge, more justice, andmore beauty.
Moores candidates for intr insicgood remain diff icult to quantify.
G. E. Moore
1873-1958
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
16/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
16
Preferences
Kenneth Arrow, a Nobel Prizewinning Stanford economist,argued that what has intrinsicvalue is preference
satisfaction. The advantage of Arrows
approach is that, in effect, itlets people choose forthemselves what has intr insicvalue. It simply defines
intrinsic value as whateversatisfies an agentspreferences. It is elegant andpluralistic.
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
17/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
17
Part Three.
The Utilitarian Calculus
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
18/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
18
The Utilitarian Calculus
Math and ethics
finally merge: all
consequences
must be measuredand weighed.
Units of
measurement:
Hedons: posit ive
Dolors: negative
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
19/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
19
What do we calculate?
Hedons/dolors may be defined in terms of Pleasure
Happiness
Ideals
Preferences For any given action, we must calculate:
How many people will be affected, negatively (dolors) aswell as posit ively (hedons)
How intensely they wi ll be affected
Similar calculations for all available alternatives
Choose the action that produces the greatest overallamount of utility (hedons minus dolors)
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
20/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
20
Example:Debating the school lunch program
Util itarians would have to calculate:
Benefits Increased nutrition for x number of children
Increased performance, greater long-range chances ofsuccess
Incidental benefits to contractors, etc.
Costs Cost to each taxpayer
Contrast with other programs that could have been
funded and with lower taxes (no program)Multiply each factor by
Number of individuals affected
Intensity of effects
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
21/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
21
How much can we quantify?
Pleasure and preference satisfaction are easier toquantify than happiness or ideals
Two dist inct issues: Can everything be quantified?
Some would maintain that some of the most importantthings in life (love, family, etc.) cannot easily be quantif ied,whi le other things (product ivity, material goods) may getemphasized precisely because they are quantif iable.
The danger: if it cant be counted, it doesnt count.
Are quantified goods necessarily commensurable?
Are a f ine dinner and a good nights s leepcommensurable? Can one be traded or subst ituted for theother?
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
22/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
22
the problems of three little
people dont amount to a hill of
beans in this crazy world. Utilitarianism
doesnt always
have a cold andcalculating face
we perform
utilitarian
calculations ineveryday life.
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
23/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
23
Part Four.
Act and RuleUtilitarianism
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
24/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
24
Act and Rule Utilitarianism
Act utilitarianism
Looks at the consequences of eachindividual act and calculate uti lity each
time the act is performed. Rule utili tarianism
Looks at the consequences of havingeveryone follow a particular rule andcalculates the overall utili ty ofaccepting or rejecting the rule.
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
25/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
25
An Example
Imagine the following scenario. A prominent and much-lovedleader has been rushed to the hospital, grievously wounded by anassassins bullet. He needs a heart and lung transplantimmediately to survive. No sui table donors are available, butthere is a homeless person in the emergency room who is beingkept alive on a respirator, who probably has only a few days tolive, and who is a perfect donor. Without the transplant, the leaderwil l die; the homeless person w ill die in a few days anyway.Security at the hospital is very well controlled. The transplant
team could hasten the death of the homeless person and carry outthe transplant without the public ever knowing that they killed thehomeless person for his organs. What should they do? For rule utilitarians, this is an easy choice. No one could approve a
general rule that lets hospitals kill patients for their organs when theyare going to die anyway. The consequences of adopting such ageneral rule would be highly negative and would certainly underminepublic trust in the medical establishment.
For act utilitarians, the situation is more complex. If secrecy wereguaranteed, the overall consequences might be such that in thisparticular instance greater utili ty is produced by hastening the deathof the homeless person and using his organs for the transplant.
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
26/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
26
The Continuing Dispute
Rule util itarians claim: In particular cases, act utili tarianism can justify
disobeying important moral rules and violatingindividual rights.
Act utilitarianism also takes too much time to calculatein each and every case.
Act utilitarians respond: Following a rule in a particular case when the overall
util ity demands that we violate the rule is just rule-worship. If the consequences demand it, we shouldviolate the rule.
Furthermore, act utili tarians can fol low rules-of-thumb(accumulated wisdom based on consequences in thepast) most of the time and engage in individualcalculation only when there is some pressing reason fordoing so.
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
27/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
27
Part Five.
Criticismsof Utilitarianism
1. Responsibility
2. Integrity
3. Intentions
4. Moral Luck5. Who does the calculating?
6. Who is included?
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
28/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
28
1. Responsibility Utilitarianism suggests that we are responsible for all the
consequences of our choices.
The problem is that sometimes we can foreseeconsequences of other peoples actions that are taken inresponse to our own acts. Are we responsible for thoseactions, even though we dont choose them or approve ofthem? Discuss Bernard Williams example of Jim in the village Imagine a terrorist situation where the terrorists say that they
wil l kill their hostages if we do not meet their demands. Werefuse to meet their demands. Are we responsible for whathappens to the hostages?
Imagine someone like Sadam Hussein putt ing children in
targets l ikely to be bombed in order to deter bombing by theUnited States. If we bomb our original targets, are weresponsible if those children are killed by our bombing?
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
29/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
29
2. Integrity
Util itarianism often demands that we put asideself-interest. Sometimes this means puttingaside our own moral convictions. Discuss Bernard Williams on the chemist example.
Develop a variation on Jim in the village, substi tut ing amercenary soldier and then Martin Luther King, Jr. forJim. Does this substitution make a difference?
Integrity may involve certain identity-conferringcommitments, such that the violation of thosecommitments entails a violation of who we are atour core.
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
30/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
30
3. Intentions
Utili tarianism is concerned almostexclusively about consequences, not
intentions.
There is a version of uti litarianism called
motive utilitarianism, developed by Robert
Adams, that attempts to correct this.
Intentions may matter is morally
assessing an agent, even if they dontmatter in terms of guiding action.
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
31/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
31
4. Moral Luck
By concentrating exclusively on consequences,utili tarianism makes the moral worth of ouractions a matter of luck. We must await the finalconsequences before we find out if our actionwas good or bad.
This seems to make the moral life a matter ofchance, which runs counter to our basic moralintuitions. We can imagine actions with good intentions that have
unforeseeable and unintended bad consequences
We can also imagine actions with bad intentions thathave unforeseeable and unintended goodconseqeunces.
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
32/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
32
5. Who does the calculating?
Historically, this was an issue for theBritish in India. The British felt theywanted to do what was best for India, butthat they were the ones to judge what that
was.See Ragavan Iyer, Utili tarianism and All That
Typically, the count differs depending onwho does the counting
In Vietnam, Americans could never understandhow much independence counted for theVietnamese.
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
33/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M. Hinman
33
6. Who is included?
When we consider the issue ofconsequences, we must ask who isincluded within that circle. Those in our own group (group egoism)
Those in our own country (nationalism)
Those who share our skin color (racism)All human beings (humanism or speciesism?)
All sentient beings
Classical uti litarianism has often claimedthat we should acknowledge the pain and
suffering of animals and not restrict thecalculus just to human beings.
-
7/23/2019 Utilitarianism-Lawrence M. Hinman
34/34
12/7/2015
Lawrence M Hinman
34
Concluding Assessment
Utilitarianism is most appropriate for
policy decisions, as long as a strong
notion of fundamental human rightsguarantees that it will not violate
rights of small minorities.