MORALITY AND ETHICS

(cont.)

UtilitarianismJohn Stuart Mill (1806-1873), English philosopher

A form of consequentialism

An act is judged to be moral or immoral according to its consequences.

Instrumentalist good vs. Intrinsic good

Instrumentalist good: good as a means by which to realize an intrinsic good, e.g. medicine

Intrinsic good: something good in and of itself, e.g. happiness

Utilitarianism (cont.)

Happiness and the absence of suffering are the ultimate intrinsic goods.

The goal of morality is to maximize happiness (“the greatest good for the greatest number”)

An act is good if it maximizes the collective happiness and minimizes the collective suffering.

Problems with UtilitarianismSeemingly immoral acts can be judged moral,

e.g. killing an innocent person.

Consequences are often difficult or impossible to predict.

The morality of an act may depend on chance (how the consequences happen to play out).

How can you calculate units of goodness (utiles)?

Happiness and lack of suffering may not be the only intrinsic goods.

Varieties of Utilitarianism

Act utilitarianism classic utilitarianism

Preference utilitarianism aim to maximize the fulfillment of people’s

preferences, rather than happiness

Rule utilitarianism act in accordance with rules that, in the long

run, tend to maximize happiness/preferences

Comparison of ethical systemsMain idea

Virtue ethics: We should cultivate the virtues and act in accordance with them. Virtues include wisdom, generosity, kindness, justice, pride, courage, honesty

Deontological ethics: follow strict moral laws, e.g. do not murder, do not lie, do not steal

Utilitarian ethics: Act to maximize total happiness (and lack of suffering) among all people

Simplification of main idea (for discussion):

Virtue ethics: be good

Kantian ethics: do what’s right

Utilitarianian ethics: do what will have good consequences

Justification:

Virtue ethics: Man’s natural function (telos) as a rational animal

Kantian ethics: universalizability of moral laws

Utilitarianism: Pleasure is good, pain is bad

Principles:

Virtue ethics: be a good (well-balanced/rational) person

Kantian ethics: Always treat a person as an end, not just an means

Utilitarianism: Promote the greatest good for the greatest number

Ultimate goal:

Virtue ethics: eudemonia (the good life)

Kantian ethics: uphold the worth and dignity of every person

Utilitarian ethics: maximize happiness

Main practical problems:

Virtue ethics: vague

Kantian ethics: rigid

Utilitarianism: may justify seemingly wrong actions

Thought experiments

Philosophers love thought experiments!

Test consistency of beliefs.

e.g. Kid breaks a vase

Should he lie to his Mom? What’s the harm?

Ethical thought experiments

A way to compare different ethical systems.

Which ethical system is consistent with our pre-theoretical beliefs?

A terrorist has secretly planted a bomb on Mr. G, and Mr. G. is now (innocently) walking into a crowded theatre. The bomb will be detonated in 5 minutes, killing hundreds. You are too far away to stop Mr. G, but you can shoot him down, killing him and saving hundreds. Should you?

Trolley case

A runaway train is about to hit 5 people on Track A. Should you throw a switch to make the train go down Track B, where one person is standing (and will be hit).

A runaway train is about to hit 5 people standing on the track. Should you push a fat man in front of the train?

Transplant case

Kill one innocent bystander and transplant his organs to five patients to save their lives

Suggested readings

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, at: http://plato.stanford.edu/

Entries on: Consequentialism and Deontological Ethics and Virtue Ethics

Mill, John Stuart, Utilitarianism (1863), available at: www.utilitarianism.com/mill1.htm

Required Reading

Stephen Law, The Philosophy Gym, Chapter 17, “Killing Mary to Save Jodie”

(in ummoodle)

Quiz next week

You will be asked about a moral dilemma and expected to discuss it in relation to one or more moral ethical systems.